From: rickan@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Mark Rickan)
Subject: Re: Promises, promises
Organization: Department of Computer Science, McMaster University
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 15:36:51 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.221213.14002@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> foax@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes:

>I'm not even sure what you mean by the "underlying corporate pecking
>order"; does IBM tell Commodore what to do?  COULD Gateway 2000 tell
>Commodore what to do?  Or do you mean within corporate computer
>environments?  In that case, I believe the system managers tend to buy
>IBM (talk about a rip-off) while individuals tend to buy from the
>really cheap companies like Gateway, Northgate, Dell, etc.

In making the reference to a perceived "pecking order", I'm inferring that
the computer industry and consumer environment in which we live are 
becoming increasingly hierarchical in nature. This should not be construed
as a comment on how demographics dictate which product one purchases,
but rather how the industry itself decides which elements are destined
to become painted birds. Diversity is essential to personal computing.
When it becomes a question of what flavour of a generic system one must 
purchase, the appeal is lost. 

>Anyway the fact is that the primary aspect of a computer's capability
>is the software that runs on it.  If nobody writes the stuff, the
>machine might as well be a lump of iron.

Agreed.

>Considering that the hardware capabilities of PC clones have increased to the
>point that they can outperform the Amiga in many respects despite their
>inferior architecture, and do so for the same or less cost, with a much larger
>support base, then the capability argument becomes moot.

Unfortunately, by virtue of the fact that volume dictates access and
development, selective reduction becomes the most pragmatic means to achieve
profitability. The problem is however, that the personal computer has
increasingly evolved as a commodity, while distancing itself from its
initial cultural appeal (enthusiasts, hackers). From a corporate standpoint
this is undoubtedly desirable, but from an individual standpoint this is
genuinely disturbing. The Amiga community is merely a microcosm and its
progress is indicative of how other alternative platforms will evolve.

>> Somehow I sympathize with the original MIT hackers that felt disdain towards
>> the "batch-processed" IBM world which encompassed them in the 60's. It's
>> just unfortunate for the rest of us that the bean-counters often prevail.

>It is a self-reinforcing system of customers, hardware makers,
>software companies, and suppliers that has prevailed, not
>"bean-counters".

I tend to believe that the objective of such self-reinforcement is to generate
revenue, as opposed to providing some sort of benevolence. As our exchange
of comments seems to indicate, there have always been two factions within the
personal computer industry: those who envision the technology as liberating,
and those who see it as a means of making money. I'm not saying that either
is necessarily preferable (or that both should be mutually exclusive), but
rather that our direction is becoming detrimental to the interests of the
individual. If we look at the industry throughout its brief history, we see
many instances where the visionaries have been succeeded by the bean-counters.
(Apple is perhaps the most effective example).

>Besides, the "rest of us" have to spend their money
>carefully, and most people don't like taking risks with $500-$2000
>worth of it.  And it's not like the rest of the computing world has
>stood still.  They've accepted GUI's, which continue to improve, and
>they are gradually moving to multitasking systems more robust and
>powerful than the Amiga's.

I don't dispute the fact that investing your money carefully is an important
aspect of social existence, nor do I dispute the fact that PC's are
increasingly becoming capable machines. I do however, disagree with the
notion that there is a collective "rest of us." This is a construct, not
a reality and one which is limiting. I am a computer enthusiast, not an Amiga
zealot and one which sees the narrowing of perspective as a *bad* thing.

>Besides which, given enough time, there WILL be a system introduced
>that will blow the entire industry away, and it WILL succeed.  Just
>don't expect every attempt at it to be successful.

I hope one day that you will prove me wrong. :)

Cheers,

Mark

-- 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
 = Mark Rickan                         ...!uunet!utai!utgpu!maccs!rickan = 
 = DCSS, McMaster University               rickan@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca = 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy