In fielding the objection that electronic games are available as both proprietary single-purpose boxes connected to televisions (aka video games), and as software for the general-purpose computer (aka computer games) I neglected to point out that my examples scribbled on the whiteboard were primarily production devices: Number crunchers, word processors, layout tools, sound processors, image processors, CAD and CAM, and video processors. These were products packaged for commercial-professional use.

With the exception of number crunchers which were introduced in an era that had yet to experience the general-purpose computer, these apparatus were almost always entered into the market at price points above that of the general-purpose computer, sometime by multiples of 2 or 3.

There are a plethora of digital devices (digiphernalia) that are not about to be subsumed by the general-purpose computer, eg. clocks, radios, TVs, game-boys, PDAs, telephones, and so on. Though these items might be task-specifically outperformed by the general-purpose computer, they are far superior in utility-specificity (size, portability, aesthetics, etc.) and their price points are invariably less, in some cases fractionally so, than the general purpose computer. (You can buy a digital watch for a dollar)

Since most of these devices now use the equivalent of a computer's CPU, (as do microwave ovens, toasters, vacuum cleaners etc.) they do avail themselves of many of the advantageous developments made in general-purpose computing. And sometimes they take the lead in innovation. This area is known in the industry as embedded systems.

Most media broadcasting is still analogue – though a more efficient use of air waves leads governments to mandate a shift towards digital broadcasting for both radio and television.

One aspect of the discussion which you should be aware of is the fact that there are two incomparable paradigms of video imaging – that of the television (interlaced) and that of the computer screen (progressive). And though you may see TV on your computer and experience the Internet on your TV – this is only accomplished by the addition of extra layers of interface and processing power with sub-optimal results.

The IT industry has lobbied presently for government mandated migration from interlaced to progressive video under the banner of “convergence”, but it has been mostly an uphill battle. HD- television has been seen as logical point of convergence between the two systems, but HD-television has become a very messy affair.