-----------------------------------------<snip>---------------------------------
My phrasing is getting to be very poor. By STUPID, I meant more that the architecture implementation was
primitive compared to today's architecures. Not that the designers or the design was stupid. It just resulted
in a "stupid computer" (one with not many abilities) compared to today's "smart
computers". Which will be considered "stupid" in the future.
-------------------------------------<unsnip>-----------------------------------
I'd accept the term "primitive" far more easily than "stupid". Leave us
always remember the speed at which technology changes. :-)
Rick
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
