Newsgroups: comp.arch
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!watdragon!spurge!ccplumb
From: ccplumb@spurge.uwaterloo.ca (Colin Plumb)
Subject: Re: AMD vs. Intel Arbitration
Message-ID: <1990Oct19.163735.25397@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Sender: daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Owner of Many System Processes)
Organization: University of Waterloo
References: <1990Oct11.214112.1392@mozart.amd.com> <0093E147.DAED9F80@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU> <1990Oct17.031047.22909@amd.com> <1416@msa3b.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 90 16:37:35 GMT
Lines: 20

In article <1416@msa3b.UUCP> torre@msa3b.UUCP (Patrick Torre) writes:
>Does anyone think that a i386 compatible chip
>will sell if it is called something like lxmn757 (or anything 
>else that does not have "386" in it) ?

Well, there's that serial chip with a FIFO that replaces the one
usually found in IBM PC's and has a part number approximately twice
that of the part it replaces, and it seems to be pretty popular.
And the number of vt100 clones with totally unrelated names is astounding.

Apparently, they're called "longhorn" and "shorthorn," which are pretty
catchy of themselves.  I wonder if those are strictly internal names
or they'll make it through the marketing morass.

(At Cogent Research, we named boards for the noble houses in Steven Brust's
books.  Phoenix, Lyorn, Dragon, Tiassa, Jhereg, etc.  I rather liked them.
Then we ended up selling it as the XTM because it "sounded like XMP".
Hopefully, rabid trademark lawyers don't read comp.arch.)
-- 
	-Colin