Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site amdcad.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!amdcad!phil
From: phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: net.micro,net.arch
Subject: Re: 386 Family Products
Message-ID: <6386@amdcad.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 16-Nov-85 01:36:57 EST
Article-I.D.: amdcad.6386
Posted: Sat Nov 16 01:36:57 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 16-Nov-85 09:27:27 EST
References: <129@intelca.UUCP> <392@aum.UUCP> <225@l5.uucp>
Reply-To: phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai)
Organization: AMD, Sunnyvale, California
Lines: 19
Xref: watmath net.micro:12713 net.arch:2093

In article <435@graffiti.UUCP> peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes:
>I must be a twit. The success of Intel can be spelled in 3 letters: I, B,
>and M. Any processor IBM chose would end up outselling the others 10:1 or
>more simply because IBM has the premier marketing department.

Now Peter, this is begging the question. Remember, IBM is out to make money.
When they choose a device, they try to make the best choice they can.
So you have to say that either IBM is a twit, which I won't accept for
a company as successful as they are, or that the 8086 was the best
choice AT THE TIME. Sure we have better choices now, but that's irrelevant.

So how come no one complains about the wimpy 6502 in Apple IIs? What is
this selective myopia? I think you're all just a bunch of IBM-phobes.
-- 
 Raise snails for fun and profit! Race them for amusement! Then eat the losers!

 Phil Ngai +1 408 749-5720
 UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil
 ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.dec.com