Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site pilchuckDataio.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!uw-june!entropy!dataio!pilchuck!jgray From: jgray@pilchuckDataio.UUCP (Jerrold Gray) Newsgroups: net.micro Subject: Re: IBM RT: first impressions Message-ID: <250@pilchuckDataio.UUCP> Date: Thu, 20-Feb-86 10:48:56 EST Article-I.D.: pilchuck.250 Posted: Thu Feb 20 10:48:56 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 24-Feb-86 05:28:09 EST References: <1400012@orstcs.UUCP> <6382@utzoo.UUCP> <151@calma.UUCP> <361@utastro.UUCP> Organization: Data I/O Corp., Redmond WA Lines: 36 > > Seriously, though, whenever you bring in a certain three letters > > into the subject, then performance becomes moot. Certain people, > > many of whom are in the position to make purchasing decisions, > > would tend to buy anything and everything they can from IBM. If > > the RT does get off the ground, it won't be because of performance, > > but simply because it has an 'IBM' label on the front. > > -- > > Tim (radzy) Radzykewycz, The Incredible Radical Cabbage. > > Riiiiiiiight. Just like the PC Jr. had. (Note past tense). > > Ed Nather > Astronomy Dept, U of Texas @ Austin > {allegra,ihnp4}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather > nather@astro.UTEXAS.EDU I tend to aggree with Tim to some extent. The PC Jr. was not targetted toward the same market as other "business" machines. If you may recall a good percentage of the marketing hype on the PC Jr. was toward home use. I don't know of anybody in the profession spectrum who considered the PC Jr. a serious business or engineering contender. The RT on the other hand is closer to the business/engineering/scientific market arena than the PC Jr. ever was. If they play their cards right (marketing-wise) the IBM label will become very important. Personally I don't think I would ever buy anything IBM makes. Jerrold L. Gray uw-beaver!teltone!dataio!pilchuck!jgray USNAIL: 10525 Willows Road N.E. /C-46 Redmond, Wa. 98052 (206) 881 - 6444 x478 Telex: 15-2167