🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1989Mar28.171856.21202@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
-In article <13332@sequent.UUCP> roc@crg2.UUCP (Ron Christian) writes:
->But just having the populated circuit card isn't enough.  One
->needs some kind of cage for it.  How about making the card the
->same format as... steady now... the IBM AT motherboard?  No really,
->I'm serious.  There are now very inexpensive boxes available for
->an AT sized motherboard.  Why not take advantage of that?  Note that
->I'm NOT suggesting that the FHF card be designed for the X86 processor,
->or that it support any of the PC busses.  Just that the boxes
->for such a form factor are cheap and plentiful.
-
-Disgusting though the thought is, using one of the PC buses is also
-probably a good idea.  That gives you access to cheap peripherals that
-you don't have to build -- and debug -- yourself.  One can make a good
-argument for also providing a better bus for crucial things, like fast
-disks, but nobody is going to want to redesign *all* the interesting
-peripherals, and nobody is going to match the production volumes (and
-hence cost savings) of (say) AT peripherals.
--- 
-Welcome to Mars!  Your         |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
-passport and visa, comrade?    | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
Has anyone ever interfaced a PC peripheral with a PC bus connector to
anything other than a 80X86 motherboard? To follow Henry's idea is to 
simply build another PC clone in my estimation. And to be perfectly honest 
why build another PC clone when you can buy one cheaper. I think the
motherboard physical sizing is a good idea but to conform to PC
bus elcetrical specs is a cop out.

Yes my anit-Intel bias is showing...

BAJ
-- 
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332
Internet:	byron@pyr.gatech.edu  uucp:	...!gatech!pyr!byron