Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!apple!portal!cup.portal.com!Bob_BobR_Retelle
From: Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: "DOS machines" (Was: TT (Who has one?))
Message-ID: <32327@cup.portal.com>
Date: 1 Aug 90 07:22:49 GMT
References: <1990Jul19.160526.2215@arcsun.arc.ab.ca>
  <6764@vax1.acs.udel.EDU> <692@cvbnetPrime.COM>
  <1990Jul27.022748.29262@math.lsa.umich.edu> <704@cvbnetPrime.COM>
  <32281@cup.portal.com> <4093@rodan.acs.syr.edu>
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 22

Replying to John Bruno's points...
 
Commodore has been doing OK using 680XX chips...
 
Apple has released some pretty impressive, if pricey, 680XX machines...
  
Atari has just about vaporized us all with their 680XX pipedreams...
  
The point is that it really doesn't MATTER what CPU a product runs, if
it's a success commercially...
 
IBM and all of its clones have sold MANY times more units than ALLLLLLLL
the 680XX machines combined...
 
That doesn't mean the 80X86 chip is any better than a 680XX chip.. it just
means that the company that sells the computers seems to have a better
handle on how to sell computers...
 
"Big Blue" is in the "Big Black" while Atari Corp is in the "Big Toilet",.
not because of any choice of microprocessor CPU...
 
BobR