Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Rich <rich@example.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2025 21:57:29 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <vlupg9$q16s$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vkjmdg$30kff$1@dont-email.me>   <nbReP.633803$oR74.271654@fx16.iad> <2e17ec15-582f-5a71-84e5-d4d490274270@example.net> <vlj20k$25740$9@dont-email.me> <7454fa51-3534-2584-2197-90613efb2091@example.net> <XPSdnbpbLvJvxeL6nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <vloss6$3e1r9$5@dont-email.me> <vlp4pc$3fpg0$7@dont-email.me> <vlpc44$3h48e$4@dont-email.me> <vlqi4a$3sp5m$2@dont-email.me> <ludkg3Fcu8aU4@mid.individual.net> <vltmrd$jnea$2@dont-email.me> <lug0u7FotnoU3@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2025 22:57:30 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b0a514186fdebd09fd2f3884727f6be8";
	logging-data="853212"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+fbIkBl0nlTYkjowQjWuTW"
User-Agent: tin/2.6.1-20211226 ("Convalmore") (Linux/5.15.139 (x86_64))
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0+0zStuEDa7n/Ns2LLNE2JT6BrY=
Bytes: 2946

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 12:06:05 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>> On 10/01/2025 22:15, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 07:27:06 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The natural tendency in a free market is that the best technology
>>>> rises to the top, becomes ubiquitous, and everybody uses it. Diversity
>>>> in technology is not desirable,. Diversity in its application is,
>>>> somewhat.
>>> 
>>> Like natural selection I would say an adequate technology rises to the
>>> top, not always the best.
>> 
>> Well it depends on what 'best' applies to.
>> 
>> Take VHS - technically inferior to Betamax but best marketed.
> 
> I had that in mind -- along with the 8088 processors and MSDOS. IBM had 
> used the 8085 in the System 23 so were familiar with Intel and wanted to 
> use readily available and inexpensive 8-bit peripherals in a product they 
> didn't really believe in. And here we are.

Other reasons that have been reported are:

1) IBM required any "outside IBM" chips to be second sourced.  Intel 
already had AMD as an official licenced second source for the 8088 
chip, Motorola did not (yet) have any second source for the 68000.

2) Intel had the chip on the market, and could supply the production 
volume (or so they claimed to IBM) IBM wanted.  Motorola had 
"pre-production" versions of the 68000 available for 'breadboarding' 
but it had not yet entered full production at the time IBM was 
selecting a CPU to use (and IIRC, was not planned to enter full 
production until after IBM had planned to release their new "PC").