Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!tekig!tekig4!brianr
From: brianr@tekig4.TEK.COM (Brian Rhodefer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: RS232 indignation
Message-ID: <2283@tekig4.TEK.COM>
Date: 22 Dec 87 01:42:23 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Tektronix Inc., Beaverton, Or.
Lines: 23
Keywords: RS232 flame

Michael Farren correctly points out the injustice of my knee-jerk
loathing of the RS232 "standard".  I must agree that the blame truly
lies with scoffstandard manufacturers.  I am curious about one aspect
of the RS232 tragedy though, particularly as I spent a little time on
one of my employer's internal standards committees:  Why didn't ANSI
sue the noncompliant manufacturers who fraudulently claimed that their
equipment had "an RS232 interface"?   Concocting a good interface is a
monumental effort; if I were a committe member, I'd be quite upset at
such a desecration.  Moreover, ANSI's standards are their "stock in trade";
the present state of RS232 cannot redound very much prestige or credit
to the Institute.  If they'd aggresively defended their (registered,
copyrighted, trademarked, and all that good legal stuff) standards
nomenclature from the start, it might have been possible to reliably
connect an "RS232 interface" cable to the "RS232 interface" connectors
of two pieces of equipment, and confidently expect those two pieces
of equipment to communicate.  Such is emphatically not possible today.

Sorry if all this belongs in another group;  I'll shut up now.


Idealistically,

Brian Rhodefer