Paul,
Thanks for the detail response.
IBM did not pick Intel's name out of a hat.
I didn't say IBM picked Intel out of the hat. I just said that if IBM didn't pick Intel, Intel would not be where it is today.
You make it sound like Intel was the only rational decision. I don't have enough information to dispute that.
Even if Intel was the only rational choice, it doesn't mean that IBM had to pick Intel. IBM has made more than a fair share of not so rational decisions.
Right now, I don't remember the specs of 68000 vs. 8086/8088, but at the time I was comparing the architectures, I remember that the 68000 had a lot cleaner, elegant design.
If IBM fully considered software development implications, the amount of human energy that would have to be spent over time around the "Kludgy" 8086 CPU compared to 68000, maybe they would have made a different decision.
Also, if the Boca Raton team were not given as much independence, maybe IBM would have designed their own CPU.
I don't the fact that Intel got a major break is something to be ashamed of. It happened and Intel took the full advantage of it.
You don't want to sound like Oprah's husband, giving lectures on how to be successful, when the major reason he is successful is because he married Oprah.
Joe |
