Heheh, well, I've always heard the same thing about the Odyssey, though I also seem to recall reading Baer's comment (thanks for quoting that, Marty). At any rate, it's amazing how much discussion can come out of a mistake or faulty reference than all of the things folks get right. I don't understand why people assume a book must be 100% accurate. That's simply impossible. I bet even Ralph doesn't remember everything about those days, and his alleged fortress of documentation may or may not be 100% comprehensive or precise. We must also remember that Baer was heavily, heavily involved in litigation over the Odyssey, and has a clear incentive to skew the facts his way (just as the Bally/Midway folks do!) In short, when you're dealing with a controversy so heated, it's wise not to take either side at face value. If Baer says the system is digital, enter that into the debate, but again, it's a claim that must be taken as evidence (not proof).

I'd also posit that terms like "digital" are fuzzy at best. A light switch has two discrete states--on or off. Does that make it digital? Likewise, an "analog" watch contains a second hand that moves a specific distance at discrete intervals. Digital? I've also heard mathematicians say that any set of switches that can be moved on or off can serve as the basis for all mathematical operations. Indeed, I've seen it demonstrated with chalk erasers rotated one way or the other to represent + or -.