[sdiy] Re: Bottom Ten ICs

[Richard Wentk]

At 05:33 08/10/2004 +0200, Theo wrote:

>----- Original Message -----
>From: Richard Wentk <richard at skydancer.com>
><snip>
> > I have no doubt it was entirely excellent at process control. I'm less
> > convinced that it was what the world needed at the centre of a home micro.
> > So far as anyone can tell it didn't take the world long to become
> > unconvinced too. ;)
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
>Form "It sucks cause it uses ram for registers" to "It sucks cause I can't
>play games on it".
>Interesting move in position :)

Which part of 'I still think the RAM approach was a crappy design decision 
with no futureproofing and hey - the rest of the world seemed to think so 
too' was I not being clear about?

>If Apple, Atari, Amiga and Sinclair had been ARMed, we probably wouldn't
>have to put up with wintel now ;-) / :-(

It took me a long time to realise that the reason the marketing guys get 
paid more than the engineers is because they're more directly responsible 
for the bottom line.

Too many engineers believe a great piece of hardware will sell itself. What 
companies like Intel and MS proved was that your product can be a steaming 
pile of crap, but if you have the right market leverage it will sell in 
huge quantities anyway.

I'm not saying I'm happy about this, but I am realistic about it.

Richard