View Single Post
Old January 21st 05, 12:18 AM
Michael W. Ryder
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a

daytripper wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:11:07 GMT, "Michael W. Ryder"

daytripper wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 06:48:57 GMT, "Michael W. Ryder"

I seem to recall IBM saying that MicroChannel Architecture was the best
thing to ever happen to PCs. Where is it now? Just because something
is "better" does not mean that the general public will accept it. Look
at Betamax vs VHS. Betamax was supposedly the better product but the
people bought the VHS standard and Betamax died.

A classic example of mis-applied logic. Nice work.

Since you went and waded in above your head, here's the clue you lack:

- MCA was a PROPRIETARY interconnect architecture.
- BetaMax was a PROPRIETARY technology package.

And what does proprietary (i.e. Microsoft) versus open (Linux, BSD,
etc.) have to do with what the people will buy, or even need.

Geeze, you can lead a guy to History but he just won't think for himself.

Since the clarion call of Open Standards = Cheaper TCO hit with a vengeance in
the '90s, proprietary solutions were doomed and "industry standard" took over.

If the effect isn't crystal clear to you, spend a few moments contemplating
the train-wreck that was the Apple Computers of the world (and the Primes, the
DECs, the Wangs, the Data Generals, etc, etc...)
What killed them? Open standards and the resulting commoditization of
computing platforms.


Just because there are cars out there that can do 200 mph does not mean that
everyone is going to buy them.

Lousy analogy, once again.
The issue is not what you buy. The issue is what is for sale. Take a look
around at what's left of proprietary solutions in the desktop computer
business and the low-end server business. See much? No?

Take a look at Dell, HP, Compaq, .... Try upgrading any of them. They
are not truly open. I owned a PC1 and had no problems upgrading it. I
can't say the same for the Dells, E-machines, etc. that I have been
asked to fix. Proprietary is still out there. Also if you look at the
RS-6000 line of IBM it is doing very well even at the low end of the market.

There will always be those who buy the
"newest and greatest" just because it is or because they bought the line
fed them by the marketers.

And? Pray tell, WTF does that have to do with viability of proprietary
solutions in cost-sensitive applications today?

How many copies of Microsoft XP, Office, etc. get sold every day even
though there are "open" replacements available. People will buy what
they know. Just like at one time the saying was "No one got fired for
buying IBM".

Since you are so stuck on open standards how come SCSI-320 is not the
current goal of everyone?

In *your* space, U320 has nothing to offer. Do you have the first clue why?

SCSI has many advantages over IDE and SATA. I have had SCSI setups for
the desktop and preferred them but try and buy a replacement for the
P2B-S today without buying a server. The only disadvantage of SCSI is
that the cost was not brought down because the volume was never that of
IDE. Much like your precious PCI-E, it is an expensive alternative to a
commodity solution. Why should anyone spend double to replace a working
card just because it is not the "newest and greatest. I just replaced
my motherboard and made sure that I did NOT get a PCI-E board. I did not
want to have to buy another $400 video card, etc. PCI-E has nothing
right now that is of benefit to most users.

It is far better than IDE,

In a single-user desktop environment, no it doesn't.
And that is yet another popular misconception you fell for. Nice.


it is open

But importantly, so are its competitors.

it is available from multiple vendors.

But importantly, at a severe price/capacity premium vs competing technologies
which offer dramatically higher price/performance on your desktop.

You getting this yet?

So why is SATA (an inferior product)

Um....OK, let's play: what makes SATA an "inferior product" in your mind?
Fair warning: if you blow chunks about specific SATA drives I'll be happy to
kick you square in the nuts for your trouble. Don't bore me.

now being offered to everyone but not SCSI?

See above. And know this: SATA will not only own the desktop for awhile, it
owns the low-end server space already, and is making major gains in the
mid-range space.

Why? Simple: TCO and price/performance of SATA drives are better than the
closest comparable SCSI lines, and you can raid-up whatever bandwidth you
desire, cheaply. Game over, bub.

Listen, you Luddites can rail against the wind all you want, but you won't
change the fact The Future Happens, old technology is replaced with new.
PCI Express is the irresistible force that will wipe the future clean of AGP.

So you took a wrong turn in Albuquerque. fyi, the path you should have
followed is labeled "The Commoditization of Computing".

hth ;-)