Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!caip!seismo!rochester!ritcv!cci632!ccird1!rb From: rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard) Newsgroups: net.micro Subject: Re: PCs, ATs, DOS, Intel chips etc./ Reasons for unhappiness? Message-ID: <472@ccird1.UUCP> Date: Thu, 12-Jun-86 13:05:56 EDT Article-I.D.: ccird1.472 Posted: Thu Jun 12 13:05:56 1986 Date-Received: Tue, 17-Jun-86 07:16:52 EDT References: <563@imsvax.UUCP> <3921@sun.uucp> <567@looking.UUCP> Reply-To: rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard) Organization: CCI Rochester Development, Rochester NY Lines: 66 Summary: A few questions. In article <567@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes: >In article <3921@sun.uucp> larryl@sun.UUCP writes: >> >>There are always companies like Apple who will reduce hardware to the >>minimum to reduce price. > >Try again. Apple is a high margin company, not a price cutter. >There is little difference in the hardware of the Atari ST and the MAC, but >observe the price differences. Depends on "who's buying", students get substantial discounts. However, I would substitute Atari for Apple. >>There is the 68008 with an 8bit bus to reduce >>costs, etc. The price may not have come down quite as quickly, but I think >>that today we would still have the Apple MacIntoshes, Atari STs, and >>Commodore Amigas at about the same price that they are today. > >IBM's price has come down largely due to competition. IBM's open architecture >and third party OS allowed cheap clones. AT Clones (I am posting from one >running a very nice Unix) are now available for $1450! (US$) Quick question: It seems that there are much fewer problems producing a 100% AT compatible than a 100% PC compatible. Did IBM change 3.0 that much? Is "basic in rom" still included on the AT? Are graphics routines centrally vectored or something? >The Mac has a proprietary OS and Rom, and the Atari ST is too cheap to make >money cloning. Only the combination of high cost and non-proprietary >hardware/software created the highly competitive PC compatible market that >drove the price down. I would agree, to a point. Ultimately, the success of the 68K machines will depend on the emergence or creation of a Standard in OS, disk format, and peripherals. Strangely enough, this seems to be happening almost in spite of the producing companies. SCSI, OS-9, and "VDI" standards may eventually give the 68K machines an edge. >>(the 386) is recognized as a stop-gap measure until the 486 > >You are the first person I have heard this from. You want my prediction, the >386 will take over the world. > I don't like to make preditions about specific companies. I would say that the first company to come out with 1280x800 (mono) graphics, 1 meg memory, 1 MIPS, Virtual memory, and non-proprietary multi-tasking in a complete system for under $1000 will shake the market so badly, that the rest will have to follow. IBM's one weakness is it's soft "Underbelly". DEC beat them in the mini market with the PDP-11 and UNIX. Later the VAX moved in to capture some of what would have been the mainframe market. Come up with a machine that is FUNCTIONALLY better than the PC, non-proprietary at the periphs and OS level, and priced well below the IBM compatible market, and you could create and capture a new, untapped market. The 68K market hasn't matured, and may never do so, if the 6502 market is any indicator. On the other hand, some National, Intel, or even Inmos chip may "pull the rug" from under the 386 before the "fat lady sings". Right now, I like the looks of the 68070, but success depends on what is done with it, not the chip itself.