Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!csinc!rpeglar
From: rpeglar@csinc.UUCP (Rob Peglar)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: processor for graphics terminal [was: PC/AT clones with RISC cpu]
Message-ID: <238@csinc.UUCP>
Date: 5 Nov 90 15:34:26 GMT
References: <2081@aber-cs.UUCP> <0093F0E4.0B02A980@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU> <1990Nov3.235115.21250@zoo.toronto.edu>
Organization: Control Systems, Inc., St. Paul MN
Lines: 29

In article <1990Nov3.235115.21250@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
> In article <0093F295.10626840@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU> sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) writes:
> >People will want X-terms and people will want PC-compatability...
> 
> By this reasoning, nobody should be building anything except PC-compatible
> X terminals.  Strangely, many manufacturers manage to make money building
> machines that are neither.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

Henry's post reflects the fact (well, OK, generalization) that
	a)  the mass market (probably ~90 %) doesn't really know what
		they want - they buy what they're told, or what's "hot",
		or whatever they see in a magazine, or what's on sale,
		or ...  you get the point.  
	b)  the above-mentioned technology "PC-compatible X terminals" may
		be the "right thing" and all, but (most) companies exist
		to make money for the shareholders - not to spread "rightness"
		to the user base.
	c)  a) + b) means that marketing, not technology or architecture,
		dominates the "computer" business.  No one should be
		surprised.  Sad, perhaps, but not surprised.

Rob
-- 
Rob Peglar	Comtrol Corp.	2675 Patton Rd., St. Paul MN 55113
		A Control Systems Company	(800) 926-6876

...uunet!csinc!rpeglar