On June 25, Ken Seefried wrote:
> >> >   What I find infuriating about this is the damned suits at Compaq (and
> >> > everywhere else, it seems) seem to be under the impression that
> >> > processor architecture is a BUSINESS DECISION.  
> >> 
> >> What?  
> >> 
> >> Oh...nevermind.  This is a venting session, one fraught with emotion.  
> >> Reality suspended momentarily. 
> > 
> >   While this is true, my statement that you quoted above stands.  I've
> > run into it time and time again. 
> > 
> >   Were you bothered by something I said? 
> > 
> >         -Dave McGuire
> 
> Bothered?  Not at all. 
> 
> I merely found the concept offered, that a processor architecture isn't a 
> business decision, to be, shall we say, quaint.  From the people who 
> conceive it, thru the people who implement it, thru the people who code for 
> it, to the people who use it, processor architecture is an amalgam of ideas 
> and compromises driven by business purposes, ultimately to serve business 
> purposes.  When business decisions go against our concepts of what is the 
> "right" decision, that can be vexing, and it's easy to loose perspective.  
> The reality of the marketplace, however, is still there. 

  I agree that this is the way the popular industry sees it.  My point
was that it's not supposed to be this way.

  ...In the same way that hospitals are often highly profitable
businesses, and cancer research is done primarily in the hopes of
making some pharmaceuticals company rich instead of saving lives.

  Call me idealistic.  I'm not out of touch with reality (hell, I WORK
in this business and have started a few companies here), I just still
have a silly belief in right and wrong, and I don't like being lied
to...which is all suits have EVER done.

          -Dave McGuire