Bell & Howell Apple II update

From: Richard Erlacher <>
Date: Sun Jan 27 00:28:14 2002

No matter how hard you try to wriggle, John, your original assertion that the
BNC was common in microcomputer video was off base, and you simply had to
insist that wasn't the case. I simply looked at the old catalogs and mag's
and could clearly see that monitors of the day, as used on microcomputers (it
was the Apple-][ that was under discussion) used PL/SO-259's since those were
what was on the common and inexpensive NTSC hardware used in CCTV and security
applications already in wide distribution back in the '70's, and unlike the
workstation hardware and high-end video production studio hardware that was
brought up at that point, which nobody would have tried to justify for use
with late-'70's microcomputer hardware, the price was the determining factor.
Sure, BNC's were probably better, but those aren't what was already built in
to the hardware of the time. Those are easily verifiable historical facts. A
single look at a catalog of the time would settle that, but ...

It's not so much about the "last word," by the way, but somebody's got to keep
you hip-shooters honest.


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Allain" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 10:53 PM
Subject: Re: Bell & Howell Apple II update

> > Apples and oranges. Comparing a PC-AT and a uVAX-II
> Has there ever been a case where he hasn't taken the last word?
> I think if I had enough wind to outblow Richard I'd be set for a
> long and successful career in politics. Thank-You no.
> John A.
Received on Sun Jan 27 2002 - 00:28:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:34:58 BST