Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcrware!jejones
From: jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: What the heck IS "Interactive TV"? (long)
Message-ID: <5967@mcrware.UUCP>
Date: 14 Apr 91 01:27:45 GMT
References: <1991Apr11.090415.5276@ncsu.edu> <1991Apr11.143222.13728@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Reply-To: jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones)
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa
Lines: 17

In article <1991Apr11.143222.13728@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes:
>  I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here and say that I don't think
>interactive TV will be the next revolutionary home device. People are
>used to being passive watchers/listeners.

I'm not sure how to reconcile that with the success of video games, though
OTOH I don't know how many video game units are out there.

>  Sure CD-I has better specs, and is backed up by major Japanese companies.
>So what? The C64 stood up to the same kind of opposition, and won!

Won in what sense?  Seen any articles on C64 programs in many computer
mags lately?  The C64 has perhaps survived as a niche item with a small
group of dedicated users, but I can't persuade myself that that is
"winning."

	James Jones