dibble@rochester.ARPA (Peter C. Dibble) (06/02/86)
In article <721@bu-cs.UUCP>, bzs@bu-cs.UUCP (Barry Shein) writes: > > There was an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal a few days > ago saying that Convergent Tech (maker of the UNIX/PC) is basically > in deep s**t over this product as AT&T has cut orders to almost nil. > I think they said a total of 10,000 were sold, around 7,000 of those > internally to AT&T. There was some mumble therein about it not being > compatible with International Business Machine's computers and it may > have been "ahead of its time". > > Too bad, I think it *is* ahead of its time and I also think its probable > death as a product can be laid to blame on letting the guys in the > twelve-piece suits do the product strategy. Sigh. And I am sure they'll > point to it and use it as an example of *ANYTHING* but their own stupidity. > He goes on to suggest that Universities would have been a good target for the Unix-PC's salesmen. I was excited about the Unix-PC when it came out. I stayed excited until I found out that AT&T was keeping all the important details about the hardware and software secret. Not just secret as in "sign this nondisclosure agreement before we give you the info you need", but secret as in, "agree to buy vast numbers of PCs before we start talking." I heard (strictly as a rumor) that Convergent started this by refusing to let the hardware details be known. If this is true, I think they have nobody but themselves to blame if the Unix-PC fails. If it's not true, find the person who decided the machine should be closed in all senses and lay the blame at his feet. Peter Dibble
david@ztivax.UUCP (06/05/86)
>Peter Dibble writes: >>Barry Shein writes: >> ...Convergent Tech (maker of the UNIX/PC) is basically >> in deep s**t over this product as AT&T has cut orders to almost nil. >I was excited about the Unix-PC when it came out. I stayed excited until >I found out that AT&T was keeping all the important details about the >hardware and software secret. ... I heard >(strictly as a rumor) that Convergent started this by refusing to let >the hardware details be known. ... [if it fails] find the >person who decided the machine should be closed in all senses and lay >the blame at his feet. When will the computer makers learn? Closed systems are totally brain damaged. If you make a good system, you will never be able to make it good enough for everyone. No matter hw big you are, you will never be able to meet the complete demands of te marketplace (thank God: it gives the others a chance too...). Xerox Star, Macintosh, UNIX-PC: All are good ideas, all are closed systems. Two seem to be outright failures on the open market, the other is dissapointing and finally being made an open system (the Mac). Apple II, IBM-PC, DEC mini's: Reasonable, horrible, or good (respectively), they all sell like crazy. They are all open systems. Disclaimer: I own or work on all of the above, but none of the manufacturers pay me anything.