see i knew i knew that i was right....  <bigfont>i am going to make my
programmer and money :)</bigfont>

andy n1yew
PS-- I use linux =)
----- Original Message -----
From: "michael brown" <n5qmg@AMSAT.ORG>
To: <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 10:23 AM
Subject: [OT]: Ridiculous Ideas was Universal programmer


> > > It's too bad that no one told microchip this when they had the
> > > "hair-brained" idea to build a microprocessor with adc's, uart's, spi
> > > interfaces, flash rom, eeprom, ram and only charge 2.00 for one.
> >
> > What are the units of 2.00 here?
> > Euros, Pounds, Punts NT$ (please yes).
> > And which MChip beauty is so cheap?
>
> Purely rhetorical.  Just trying to make a point, not trying to be literal.
> US$
>
> >
> > > After all the world was going to
> > > need only three mainframe computers to meet all of its data processing
> > needs
> > > (according to another self proclaimed expert).
> >
> > It was IBM !!!
> > (And I think it was  few more than 3, but not many).
>
> It was three.
>
> <RANT>
>
> Sorry James if I came off too offensive, but I'm kinda tired of posts that
> are demeaning without offering an explanation based on solid reasoning.  I
> spend allot of time trying to carefully read every post.  And when you
have
> two jobs its hard to keep up with all the activity.  So please everyone,
If
> someone has and idea or wants to tackle a project that might be considered
a
> waste of time, let's not slap them down, just because.  Many of the best
> inventions started out as "stupid, useless, pointless wastes of time".
>
> Taking Linux for example, it was an immense waste of time to develop an
> entire operating system that no-one would use.  Now there are millions of
> people running a Unix operating system in their homes.  Microcontrollers
> themselves are sort of self contradiction.  I mean using a computer to run
a
> thermostat?!?  Fifteen years ago, someone would have said "That's
> ridiculous".  The difference between what is ridiculous and what is not is
> TIME!
>
> I used to work for a software company that wanted to develop a new product
> (a production job scheduler) and I offered the "ridiculous" idea of
building
> it to run on a PC and then just build the hooks into the individual OS's
and
> communicate to the central PC.  That way the scheduler would only have to
be
> developed once, and you could have cross-platform scheduling.  Well,
> naturally, the 'powers that be' thought this was a "ridiculous" idea.  I
> mean, who would pay 40-50K for a piece of software that ran on a PC?  I
> suggested also that it be developed to run under Linux, since we could
> supply the PC and the OS for free to the customer.  This was 6 or 7 years
> ago and at the time Linux was a novelty.  But, since a project of this
> magnitude takes  years to develop, you need to try to have the foresight
to
> predict what the market is going to be 'down the road'.  Naturally, they
> didn't do it that way, but the competition did.  Now the software company
is
> virtually bankrupt because everyone seems to need a job scheduler that
runs
> centrally and can schedule across different platforms.  I'm not trying to
> "blow my horn" but make the point, that what may seem "ridiculous" now may
> be the norm tomorrow.
>
> </RANT>
>
> michael brown
> flames welcome but we should probably do it off list unless James doesn't
> mind
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
> email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body
>
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body