Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wuarchive!uunet!stanford.edu!neon.Stanford.EDU!pescadero.Stanford.EDU!philip
From: philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: IIci 5/160 configuration
Keywords: Mac IIci
Message-ID: <1991Jun8.054444.24285@neon.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 8 Jun 91 05:44:44 GMT
References: <1991May25.043909.765@world.std.com> <1991Jun7.125253.10301@cbnewsc.att.com> <1991Jun7.231510.16985@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Sender: news@neon.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System)
Reply-To: philip@pescadero.stanford.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 22

In article <1991Jun7.231510.16985@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, cjeff@silver.lcs.mit.edu (Carl J.M. Alexander) writes:
|> In article <1991Jun7.125253.10301@cbnewsc.att.com> straka@cbnewsc.att.com (richard.j.straka) writes:
|> >I read in EE Times that the disk drive mentioned here is manufactured by IBM. 
|> >Yes, IBM!  Necessity makes for strakng bedfellows sometimes.
|>  
|> But I'll bet there's someone in IBM management who's clever enough to dream
|> up a way to sell Apple a batch of drives that are ever-so-subtly defective....
|>  
Who knows? Has anyone read the story in Wall Street Journal about
Apple considering IBM's RISC processor for its future machine?

Any thoughts on this? Could it be that IBM is getting tired of
Microsoft?

I hope Apple will make a technically reasonable
decision (as I believe they did in going for the Motorola
for the original Mac) if they are chosing a new CPU.

As with CISC, there are some dud RISC architectures.
-- 
Philip Machanick
philip@pescadero.stanford.edu