Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Monster Park

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
September 29, 2004 6:37:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

http://www.monstercable.com/MonsterPark/

More about : monster park

Anonymous
September 29, 2004 6:37:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <415B00E2.7FA62C4E@comcast.net>,
Don Cooper <dcooper28800@comcast.net> wrote:

> http://www.monstercable.com/MonsterPark/


It's still Candlestick Park and always will be. San Francisco has a proposal on
the upcoming ballot that would prevent the city/county from selling naming
rights.

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x
Anonymous
September 29, 2004 7:33:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jay Kadis <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> Don Cooper <dcooper28800@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> http://www.monstercable.com/MonsterPark/
>
>It's still Candlestick Park and always will be. San Francisco has a proposal on
>the upcoming ballot that would prevent the city/county from selling naming
>rights.

I think Monster Park is a great name. I think of Godzilla and Mothra eating
a huge stadium.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Related resources
Anonymous
September 29, 2004 7:33:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <cjf2n4$rnh$1@panix2.panix.com>, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
wrote:

> Jay Kadis <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> > Don Cooper <dcooper28800@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> >> http://www.monstercable.com/MonsterPark/
> >
> >It's still Candlestick Park and always will be. San Francisco has a
> >proposal on
> >the upcoming ballot that would prevent the city/county from selling naming
> >rights.
>
> I think Monster Park is a great name. I think of Godzilla and Mothra eating
> a huge stadium.
> --scott

It's too cold for them there! I mean, Godzilla's cold blooded.

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x
Anonymous
September 29, 2004 10:18:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Jay Kadis" <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote in message
news:jay-33DDBD.11565729092004@news.stanford.edu...
> In article <415B00E2.7FA62C4E@comcast.net>,
> Don Cooper <dcooper28800@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> http://www.monstercable.com/MonsterPark/
>
>
> It's still Candlestick Park and always will be. San Francisco has a
> proposal on
> the upcoming ballot that would prevent the city/county from selling naming
> rights.

It would appear to be too late by the account of the cited story.

Monster as a "leading technology company"?
Or perhaps as a leading marketing company.
Anonymous
September 30, 2004 8:47:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Scott Dorsey" wrote:
>
> I think Monster Park is a great name. I think of Godzilla and Mothra
eating
> a huge stadium.

It's a lot better than Verizon Park or Prudential Financial Park or some
other really tediously named uber corporation.

-jw
Anonymous
September 30, 2004 11:21:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <10lmnnu271dl28f@corp.supernews.com>,
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:

> "Jay Kadis" <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote in message
> news:jay-33DDBD.11565729092004@news.stanford.edu...
> > In article <415B00E2.7FA62C4E@comcast.net>,
> > Don Cooper <dcooper28800@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> >> http://www.monstercable.com/MonsterPark/
> >
> >
> > It's still Candlestick Park and always will be. San Francisco has a
> > proposal on
> > the upcoming ballot that would prevent the city/county from selling naming
> > rights.
>
> It would appear to be too late by the account of the cited story.
>

It's never too late for the lawyers.

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x
Anonymous
September 30, 2004 12:37:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <TdM6d.49347$Ot3.47807@twister.nyc.rr.com> johnwashburn99@nyc.rr.com writes:

> It's a lot better than Verizon Park or Prudential Financial Park or some
> other really tediously named uber corporation.

I always liked 3Com park. Practically nobody knew what that was.

We have FedEx Field. I guess it's a good thing that FedEx bought
Kinko's and not the other way around. I'm not sure I'd like to see the
Redskins play at Kinko's Field.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
September 30, 2004 2:50:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"John Washburn" <johnwashburn99@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message news:<TdM6d.49347$Ot3.47807@twister.nyc.rr.com>...
> "Scott Dorsey" wrote:
> >
> > I think Monster Park is a great name. I think of Godzilla and Mothra
> eating
> > a huge stadium.
>
> It's a lot better than Verizon Park or Prudential Financial Park or some
> other really tediously named uber corporation.
>
> -jw

Personally, I'd like to see the place named Preparation H Park, and I
live here (SF). At least it would be worth a laugh.
Anonymous
September 30, 2004 6:19:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 14:37:24 -0400, Don Cooper
<dcooper28800@comcast.net> wrote:
> http://www.monstercable.com/MonsterPark/

The hot dogs will be fatter than normal hot dogs, and have superior
caloric conversion to energy.

Don't listen to those who claim "A calorie is a calorie" Our Magickal
powers make our patented Calories SUPERIOR to all other calories, and
hence worth the 10x markup.
Anonymous
September 30, 2004 6:19:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

U-CDK_CHARLES\\Charles wrote:

> The hot dogs will be fatter than normal hot dogs, and have superior
> caloric conversion to energy.


They'll also have arrows on them, to tell you which end you should bite first.
September 30, 2004 7:31:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 30 Sep 2004 08:37:57 -0400, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers)
wrote:

>
>In article <TdM6d.49347$Ot3.47807@twister.nyc.rr.com> johnwashburn99@nyc.rr.com writes:
>
>> It's a lot better than Verizon Park or Prudential Financial Park or some
>> other really tediously named uber corporation.
>
>I always liked 3Com park. Practically nobody knew what that was.
>
>We have FedEx Field. I guess it's a good thing that FedEx bought
>Kinko's and not the other way around. I'm not sure I'd like to see the
>Redskins play at Kinko's Field.


There's a local business in the East Bay called "Your Black Muslim
Bakery". I'm still waiting for them to buy the naming rights to the
Oakland Coliseum so we could have "Your Black Muslim Coliseum".

Darryl
Anonymous
September 30, 2004 7:41:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Don Cooper <dcooper28800@comcast.net> wrote in
news:415B00E2.7FA62C4E@comcast.net:

> http://www.monstercable.com/MonsterPark/

Perhaps they should rebuild the park 4 times the required size,
Paint the rails gold to let the fans get in and out more smoothly,
and charge 10 times the current ticket price.
Anonymous
October 1, 2004 12:04:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:
> I always liked 3Com park. Practically nobody knew what that was.

Back when 3com started the whole thing by sponsoring Candlestick
Park, I was upset because I thought it would've been a whole lot
more appropriate for Xerox to do it instead.

But then, pretty much only computer nerds or Palo Alto residents get
that joke, and very few of them actually think it's funny...

- Logan
Anonymous
October 1, 2004 12:04:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <GFZ6d.2284$VB3.2033@fe2.texas.rr.com>,
Logan Shaw <lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com> wrote:

> Mike Rivers wrote:
> > I always liked 3Com park. Practically nobody knew what that was.
>
> Back when 3com started the whole thing by sponsoring Candlestick
> Park, I was upset because I thought it would've been a whole lot
> more appropriate for Xerox to do it instead.
>
> But then, pretty much only computer nerds or Palo Alto residents get
> that joke, and very few of them actually think it's funny...
>
> - Logan



-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x
Anonymous
October 1, 2004 12:04:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Logan Shaw" <lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:GFZ6d.2284$VB3.2033@fe2.texas.rr.com...
snip
> more appropriate for Xerox to do it instead.
>
> But then, pretty much only computer nerds or Palo Alto residents get
> that joke, and very few of them actually think it's funny...

ha ha funny. But then I'm a geek from Palo Alto. We even had bass bin
sized, Xerox PARC computers at my junior high school.
--

Ulrich DoD#732
www.dj-ulrich.com
adelphia email addy is never checked, please use URL above.
Anonymous
October 1, 2004 2:14:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <GFZ6d.2284$VB3.2033@fe2.texas.rr.com> lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com writes:

> Back when 3com started the whole thing by sponsoring Candlestick
> Park, I was upset because I thought it would've been a whole lot
> more appropriate for Xerox to do it instead.
>
> But then, pretty much only computer nerds or Palo Alto residents get
> that joke, and very few of them actually think it's funny...

I'm not a Palo Alto resident or computer nerd, and I don't get the
joke. Is it worth explaining?

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
October 1, 2004 6:49:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:

> In article <GFZ6d.2284$VB3.2033@fe2.texas.rr.com> lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com writes:
>
>
>>Back when 3com started the whole thing by sponsoring Candlestick
>>Park, I was upset because I thought it would've been a whole lot
>>more appropriate for Xerox to do it instead.
>>
>>But then, pretty much only computer nerds or Palo Alto residents get
>>that joke, and very few of them actually think it's funny...
>
>
> I'm not a Palo Alto resident or computer nerd, and I don't get the
> joke. Is it worth explaining?
>


Google up "Xerox Parc".

> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
--
Les Cargill
Anonymous
October 1, 2004 7:20:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 30 Sep 2004 22:14:04 -0400, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers)
wrote:

>> Candlestick Park, I was upset because I thought it would've been a whole lot
>> more appropriate for Xerox to do it instead.

>I'm not a Palo Alto resident or computer nerd, and I don't get the
>joke. Is it worth explaining?

Xerox PARC was the home of GUI's and mousing, etc.
Kind of apocryphal in the Apple canon. And later stolen by
everybody else.

Chris Hornbeck
Anonymous
October 1, 2004 2:29:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <bB37d.651236$Gx4.9535@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> lcargill@worldnet.att.net writes:

> >>Back when 3com started the whole thing by sponsoring Candlestick
> >>Park, I was upset because I thought it would've been a whole lot
> >>more appropriate for Xerox to do it instead.

> Google up "Xerox Parc".

Oh. Sorry, I'm just slow, or forgetful. That was a long time ago.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
October 1, 2004 4:10:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>Preparation H Park.

Well you at that place, the 7th inning stretch, has got to be the most
anticipated part of the game.

Tom




"Gary Flanigan" <gary_flanigan@ce9.uscourts.gov> wrote in message
news:953629a1.0409300950.bff09d2@posting.google.com...
> "John Washburn" <johnwashburn99@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:<TdM6d.49347$Ot3.47807@twister.nyc.rr.com>...
> > "Scott Dorsey" wrote:
> > >
> > > I think Monster Park is a great name. I think of Godzilla and Mothra
> > eating
> > > a huge stadium.
> >
> > It's a lot better than Verizon Park or Prudential Financial Park or some
> > other really tediously named uber corporation.
> >
> > -jw
>
> Personally, I'd like to see the place named Preparation H Park, and I
> live here (SF). At least it would be worth a laugh.
Anonymous
October 2, 2004 12:29:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Chris Hornbeck" wrote ...
> Xerox PARC was the home of GUI's and mousing, etc.
> Kind of apocryphal in the Apple canon. And later stolen by
> everybody else.

Somewhere around here I have a very old copy of a Scientific
American magazine with an article on the Xerox Palo Alto
Research Center (PARC). It showed all the things we now
take for granted, overlapping, resizable windows, use of a
mouse and cursor, etc. etc. In the back of the same magazine
is a small 1-column ad with a picture of the "Apple-1" PC
board likely taken in Steve Jobs' garage. Apple and MS
both derived the idea of windows from Xerox. That is why
Apple's suit against MS for "stealing windows" was a big
steaming crock, and the courts agreed.
Anonymous
October 2, 2004 12:14:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Richard Crowley <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:
>
>Somewhere around here I have a very old copy of a Scientific
>American magazine with an article on the Xerox Palo Alto
>Research Center (PARC). It showed all the things we now
>take for granted, overlapping, resizable windows, use of a
>mouse and cursor, etc. etc. In the back of the same magazine
>is a small 1-column ad with a picture of the "Apple-1" PC
>board likely taken in Steve Jobs' garage. Apple and MS
>both derived the idea of windows from Xerox. That is why
>Apple's suit against MS for "stealing windows" was a big
>steaming crock, and the courts agreed.

Yes, but Apple paid licensing to Xerox for the use of the concept, and
Microsoft did not.

That said, my department had a Xerox Star in college, and I thought the
whole GUI notion was a lousy one. Much more cumbersome than a command
line. But then, I still think so.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
October 2, 2004 12:53:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cjm63c$5rv$1@panix2.panix.com...
> Richard Crowley <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:
>>....Apple and MS
>>both derived the idea of windows from Xerox. That is why
>>Apple's suit against MS for "stealing windows" was a big
>>steaming crock, and the courts agreed.
>
> Yes, but Apple paid licensing to Xerox for the use of the
> concept, and Microsoft did not.

In which case Apple had no legal standing. It should have
been Xerox vs. MS. OTOH, their "acquisition" of DOS
from Digital Research was no less questionable.

Bringing the topic around, some companies are much more
marketing organizations than technical ones. Monster and
Microsoft come to mind, but at least Microsoft does more
of their own work these days.

Does Monster have *any* real technological innovations to
its name? "Bigger wire is better" doesn't really seem like a
huge technology accomplishment. But then where I work we
put several hundred million transistors on a chip the size of
your thumbnail, so I may have a jaded perspective?

And Monster and Apple seem to share the marketing concept
that "expensive is better". Apparently there is a loyal (although
dwindling) segment of customers that go along with that scheme.

> That said, my department had a Xerox Star in college, and I
> thought the whole GUI notion was a lousy one. Much more
> cumbersome than a command line. But then, I still think so.

Indeed. I am just adding the "after-the-fact" features that the
customers (VPs) want on my web-based project (approaching
10,000 lines of code). But there are some things for which
GUIs are either awkward or just not capable of doing.
Anonymous
October 2, 2004 2:38:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Richard Crowley wrote:


> In which case Apple had no legal standing. It should have
> been Xerox vs. MS. OTOH, their "acquisition" of DOS
> from Digital Research was no less questionable.


Seattle Computer developed QDOS, which is what Moft acquired. Gary
Kildall (DR) was just asleep at the switch.

As for the PARC GUI, Apple really took it and ran with it, after which
Moft just tried to copy it. Maybe the RIAA should have been a witness.
Anonymous
October 2, 2004 3:10:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I hate the concept of stadiums changing their name just to get it heard on
TV for advertisement purposes. Just like I hate Nascar drivers spouting off
sponsers when they should be happy about a win and talking about that
instead.

What is next? Players changing their names to 'Post It Smith' or 'Dave
Honda' or 'Neuman Shure'. Ok, I'll stop now.

But get the point? F-in sick. Watch, it will happen.


--

-Hev
find me here:
www.michaelspringer.com
Anonymous
October 2, 2004 3:38:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"S O'Neill" wrote ...
> Seattle Computer developed QDOS, which is what Moft acquired. Gary
> Kildall (DR) was just asleep at the switch.

Seattle Computer was a DR dealer. I've seen the identical
object code from DRDOS to MSDOS. Agreed that Kildall
was no match for Gates in the business acumen arena.
Anonymous
October 2, 2004 4:46:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hev wrote:

> I hate the concept of stadiums changing their name just to get it heard on
> TV for advertisement purposes. Just like I hate Nascar drivers spouting off
> sponsers when they should be happy about a win and talking about that
> instead.
>
> What is next? Players changing their names to 'Post It Smith' or 'Dave
> Honda' or 'Neuman Shure'. Ok, I'll stop now.
>
> But get the point? F-in sick. Watch, it will happen.


Too late, my names have been for sale for years. $1 million each, or $3
million for both.

So far no one has bought one, so you could be the first.
Anonymous
October 2, 2004 4:50:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Richard Crowley wrote:

> "S O'Neill" wrote ...
>
>>Seattle Computer developed QDOS, which is what Moft acquired. Gary
>>Kildall (DR) was just asleep at the switch.
>
>
> Seattle Computer was a DR dealer. I've seen the identical
> object code from DRDOS to MSDOS. Agreed that Kildall
> was no match for Gates in the business acumen arena.


Of course, DR was CP/M, the OS of the day, so everyone was a DR dealer.
And QDOS sure was a lot like CPM (as was MS-DOS); it was basically the
same thing ported to Intel's new terminal controller chip (8088 in
"maximum mode").
Anonymous
October 2, 2004 8:34:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hev wrote:

> What is next? Players changing their names to 'Post It Smith' or 'Dave
> Honda' or 'Neuman Shure'. Ok, I'll stop now.
>
> But get the point? F-in sick. Watch, it will happen.

It's already happened; dig that Suzuki guy. <g>

--
ha
Anonymous
October 2, 2004 8:34:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"hank alrich" <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message
news:1gl0vwg.1vrf2nc11dbkfiN%walkinay@thegrid.net...
> Hev wrote:
>
>> What is next? Players changing their names to 'Post It Smith' or 'Dave
>> Honda' or 'Neuman Shure'. Ok, I'll stop now.
>>
>> But get the point? F-in sick. Watch, it will happen.
>
> It's already happened; dig that Suzuki guy. <g>
>
> --




<g>

--

-Hev
find me here:
www.michaelspringer.com
Anonymous
October 3, 2004 2:56:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Richard Crowley <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:
>"S O'Neill" wrote ...
>> Seattle Computer developed QDOS, which is what Moft acquired. Gary
>> Kildall (DR) was just asleep at the switch.
>
>Seattle Computer was a DR dealer. I've seen the identical
>object code from DRDOS to MSDOS. Agreed that Kildall
>was no match for Gates in the business acumen arena.

DRDOS came _after_ MS-DOS.

Q-DOS was in fact a poor imitation of DR's CP/M, done by someone who did
not really understand why CP/M 2.2 did some of the things that it did.

But for that matter, most of the CP/M user interface was cribbed from
DEC's RT-11, including even things like the PIP command and the SYSGEN
procedure.

When the IBM PC came out, you could get MS-DOS for a minimal cost, or CP/M-86
for a substantial amount. MS-DOS took over the market, although it took
a few years to do so. (You could also opt to use neither one and run only
BASIC in ROM with the cassette port, something people don't seem to remember
much about the original IBM PC these days).

Only after there was a sizeable installed base for MS-DOS and the revenues
for CP/M were tanking did DR come out with DR DOS.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
October 3, 2004 12:47:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"hank alrich" wrote ...
> Richard Crowley wrote:
>
>> And Monster and Apple seem to share the marketing concept
>> that "expensive is better".
>
> http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/36120.html

Flawed logic. Incomplete data. The feedback at the bottom of their
page doesn't agree with the editorial any more than I do.

They don't even discuss the concept of DIY PCs where you can pick
and choose components, and upgrade only the ones you need instead
of buying a complete new computer. IMHO that is the great difference
between the Mac concept and open-standard PC. I would think that an
article in a Linux forum (of all places!) would comprehend open
standards better than that? Apple has used all means possible to ensure
that they have no competition to either their hardware or software
products. That is not an admirable business concept IMHO. YMMV.
Anonymous
October 3, 2004 1:15:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cjnpp2$73o$1@panix1.panix.com...
> Richard Crowley <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:
>>"S O'Neill" wrote ...
>>> Seattle Computer developed QDOS, which is what Moft acquired. Gary
>>> Kildall (DR) was just asleep at the switch.
>>
>>Seattle Computer was a DR dealer. I've seen the identical
>>object code from DRDOS to MSDOS. Agreed that Kildall
>>was no match for Gates in the business acumen arena.
>
> DRDOS came _after_ MS-DOS.

Bzzzzt! Yes, of course, I meant CP/M. I was elected VP of the
CP/M Users Group Northwest >20 years ago and my poor memory
is troubling. :-(

> Q-DOS was in fact a poor imitation of DR's CP/M, done by
> someone who did not really understand why CP/M 2.2 did
> some of the things that it did.
>
> But for that matter, most of the CP/M user interface was
> cribbed from DEC's RT-11, including even things like the
> PIP command and the SYSGEN procedure.

And the story is that after my employer paid Gary Killdal for
one of the first high-level languages for our microprocessors
(PL/M), they rejected the concept of an "operating system" and
Gary went on to create and sell CP/M. Oh well. We're better
at making chips than software.
Anonymous
October 3, 2004 5:39:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Richard Crowley wrote:


>>>And Monster and Apple seem to share the marketing concept
>>>that "expensive is better".


I can confirm that "better is more expensive". I disagree that Apples
are merely more expensive. Monster is a different ball park.


l any more than I do.
>
> They don't even discuss the concept of DIY PCs where you can pick
> and choose components, and upgrade only the ones you need instead
> of buying a complete new computer. IMHO that is the great difference
> between the Mac concept and open-standard PC. I would think that an
> article in a Linux forum (of all places!) would comprehend open
> standards better than that? Apple has used all means possible to ensure
> that they have no competition to either their hardware or software
> products. That is not an admirable business concept IMHO. YMMV.


I think they tried that once and the result was flakey hardware. One
can certainly argue with varying success that that is one of the IBM
architecture's shortcomings.
Anonymous
October 3, 2004 11:46:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"S O'Neill" <nopsam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:nqednf8MqaUX_v3cRVn-ig@omsoft.com...
> Richard Crowley wrote:
>
>
>>>>And Monster and Apple seem to share the marketing concept
>>>>that "expensive is better".
>
>
> I can confirm that "better is more expensive". I disagree that Apples are
> merely more expensive. Monster is a different ball park.
>
>
> l any more than I do.
>>
>> They don't even discuss the concept of DIY PCs where you can pick
>> and choose components, and upgrade only the ones you need instead
>> of buying a complete new computer. IMHO that is the great difference
>> between the Mac concept and open-standard PC. I would think that an
>> article in a Linux forum (of all places!) would comprehend open
>> standards better than that? Apple has used all means possible to ensure
>> that they have no competition to either their hardware or software
>> products. That is not an admirable business concept IMHO. YMMV.
>
>
> I think they tried that once and the result was flakey hardware. One can
> certainly argue with varying success that that is one of the IBM
> architecture's shortcomings.
Anonymous
October 3, 2004 11:59:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"S O'Neill" wrote ...
> Richard Crowley wrote:
>
>
>>>>And Monster and Apple seem to share the marketing concept
>>>>that "expensive is better".
>
> I can confirm that "better is more expensive". I disagree that Apples are
> merely more expensive. Monster is a different ball park.

Was that an intentional pun? :-))

[competitive, Mac-compatible hardware]

> I think they tried that once and the result was flakey hardware.

It was a very startup industry and Apple came down hard on them
before they ever got to the 2nd generation of products. They were
basing designs on extrapolations of what the (unpublished) Apple
specs might have been.

> One can certainly argue with varying success that that is one of the IBM
> architecture's shortcomings.

Perhaps. But I don't know anyone who denies that hardware
(and software/OS, mostly) open-standards and the resulting
open-market competition are likely the single most significant
factor in the PC's continued, overwhelming market share.

Not denying that closed/proprietary was reputedly IBM/Boca's
original intent, but for whatever reason, they let it slip out of their
control and look where we are now (for better or for worse :-)
Anonymous
October 4, 2004 7:39:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 19:59:41 -0700, "Richard Crowley"
<rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:

> But I don't know anyone who denies that hardware
>(and software/OS, mostly) open-standards and the resulting
>open-market competition are likely the single most significant
>factor in the PC's continued, overwhelming market share.
>
>Not denying that closed/proprietary was reputedly IBM/Boca's
>original intent, but for whatever reason, they let it slip out of their
>control and look where we are now (for better or for worse :-)
>

<other well-focused comments snipped for bandwidth>

It's a unique situation in Consumerland. Has there *ever* been
another dominant non-proprietary consumer standard post-war?

And secondarily, my memory of the times was that lots hinged
on the legal breaking of the IBM BIOS. The lesson of hardware
vs. software still haunts us. Down where it counts, in the
pants pocket.

Chris Hornbeck
!