15 Jun
2009
15 Jun
'09
5:25 p.m.
I'm particularly impressed with the TI-99/4A in problem #13
http://technologizer.com/2009/06/14/fifteen-classic-pc-design-mistakes/
15 Jun
15 Jun
6:05 p.m.
He, he, he... I can't stop... he, he, he... but the #15 is a great candidate
to the gold medal...
2009/6/15 Brian Lanning <brianlanning at gmail.com>
I'm particularly impressed with the TI-99/4A in
problem #13
http://technologizer.com/2009/06/14/fifteen-classic-pc-design-mistakes/
6:35 p.m.
Brian Lanning wrote:
I'm particularly impressed with the TI-99/4A in
problem #13
http://technologizer.com/2009/06/14/fifteen-classic-pc-design-mistakes
I didn't follow the TI 99/4 home computer and don't remember much
from it (other than it was sold at the TI retail
stores.
Was the reason for the design perhaps an intentional crippling of the
consumer device because of perceived sales threat to the TI 990/4
(and later) minis that used the same TMS9900 chip?
--Chuck
6:46 p.m.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Chuck Guzis<cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
I didn't follow the TI 99/4 home computer and
don't remember much
from it (other than it was sold at the TI retail stores.
Was the reason for the design perhaps an intentional crippling of the
consumer device because of perceived sales threat to the TI 990/4
(and later) minis that used the same TMS9900 chip?
Not sure about the TI, but that line of thinking was definitely behind
some of the other machines, the PCjr for example. How many times,
even recently, have we heard that a certain CPU or computer design was
only for servers?
5682
days inactive
5682
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
aek＠bitsavers.org -
brianlanning＠gmail.com -
cclist＠sydex.com -
spedraja＠ono.com