🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <C0GG3B.6KG@ecf.toronto.edu> alrashi@ecf.toronto.edu (AL RASHID SHAHIR) writes:
>I posted this thread quite a while back, but it did'nt seem to stir anything
>so here I go again. BTW, this is not (well, shouldn't be anyway) flamebait...

That first line sounds rather baiting, I must say. (Oh btw, what happened to
your RETURN key? It seemed to work fine in one of your previous posts...)
>
>Regarding the X86 line...
>Hey, I'm assuming MOST of you know about the big layoff by IBM in the last few
>months...Jeez!! Anyway, just wanted to tell all you hidden IBM advocates in
>ATARI advocating skins...IBM has their own problems too, eh? Just look at the
>P5 (or 586)... I guess you guy's in the PC world are gonna start feeling the
>money pinch pretty sonn if you want to upgrade. While everyone in the other
>computer markets keep "upgrading" their computers (dunno what to call it
>anymore; re:flamewar on upgrading...) at the s
>
>proximate prices, all you compatible users will no longer be able to upgrade
>with "compatible" prices anymore. 

It's funny, looking at how things develop. Sun totally wiped out Apollo, which
used to be the dominant force in the workstation market, by developing their
SPARC chip and licensing it out to other vendors. IBM is getting wiped out
because they began with a fully open system design. I guess there were just
too many little upstarts for their legal department to chase them all down.
(Notice how tightly they still hold the reins on their mainframe stuff. Except
for Amdahl tho, who would want to be *in* that market, I wonder...)

> What happens when Motorola comes out with the (in development) 68060??? This
>will surely blow away the 486 (not a jibe). The point is, 486 users will
>surely want to upgrade (human nature) but what will they upgrade too? IBM in
>their perilous position will have to sell the P5 at higher (maybe much higher)
>cost than other compatibles, as compatibles will no longer exist...(P5 will be
>copyrighted - or IBm will die). With all the trouble between IBM (one side),
>and Microsoft and Intel (the other side), I
>
>heard rumours (reasonably reliable and logical) that IBM is quite interested
>in Motorola's 86000 line (not sure), which are RISC based, to use in future
>computers. Maybe true (IMHO), maybe not...but it still highlights the fact
>that IBM is dissatisfied with Intel.

Registering the P5 name and design isn't going to save IBM, it'll just make
their bad position worse. (Of course, it's actually Intel that's going thru
the motions of trademarking the P5, since they designed it. It's probably a
good move for them, since they *are* losing money to the other 486 clones
that are out there. Note that IBM has developed their own 486SX clone already,
further evidence of their dissatisfaction with Intel...) At any rate, it's
fairly obvious that open systems are the key to today's market, and if IBM is
going to try to close down to a secret proprietary design, the market is going
to say goodbye to them...

As for IBM's interest in Motorola - they have a joint development agreement
to make the PowerPC series RISC chip. I don't think IBM wants the 88100
series chips for anything. NeXT and Apple seem to be the big contenders
there...

> How 'bout Microsoft? Jeez, any idiot can see that IBM do not like Microsoft
>anymore (just look at the conflict between OS/2 and Windows if you don't
>believe me!). Or how about the new dos IBM releases?? IBM dos Version 5 ?????
>If these aren't moves to pull away from Microsoft, what is??
> IBM, a company with conflicts with their biggest software supporter and even
>their chip developer... Makes you think doesn't it..?

It would be *nice* if something made people think...
>
> How about Atari?? Jeez, close to another basket case!! Atari's fanatical
>supporters will continue to plug the Falcon.. but if Jack Tramiel (who is
>back from a long absence - notice the chaos in his absence) doesn't do
>something fast (which I think he is already doing... don't know what it is,
>though) the company's computer branch is sunk. The incredible thing is,
>without the ST or the Falcon, or any computers...Atari will not necessarily
>die! With their Lynx (more a scaled-down portable Amiga than a
>
>g else) doing good business, Atari Games (which is at least paying royalties
>for the name Atari if nothing else- I don't know the story here...), and even
>the Atari PC (hey don't knock it, even Commodore PC's exist - I've used both)
>will keep Atari afloat...for how long, I don't know. Certainly longer than
>IBM, IMHO.

Atari Computer Corporation would pretty much have to fold. Atari Games is
totally independent. And thinking that Atari Computer could survive solely
on their Lynx and PC sales is pretty irrational, don't you think? You've
already pointed out how terrible the PC clone market is in the previous
paragraphs, so why would you consider the Atari PC to be an asset at this
point? The positions seem pretty irreconcilable, in my view...
>
> Y'see, Atari's in trouble..but owing to their RELATIVELY small stature
>(compared to the worldwide IBM), it will stay afloat quite a bit longer than
>IBM (with their rapidly failing RISC market and all)... So to all out, there
>there is "no fate but what we make..." <--- great line eh?? (got it from T2 if
>ya didn't know!)

Hm. Bigger they are, the harder they fall? I'm more inclined to think, he
who has the deepest pockets, wins.
>
>Thanks for the ear, if anyone waded through this..
>AcEzE
-- 
  -- Howard Chu @ Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA

There's a rough border between genius and insanity, but I'm a dual citizen.