slipstick:
One the things inside a servo is indeed a motor. But that's not a good reason enough for referring to the whole servo as though it was just a motor.My car contains a fuel tank but if I talked about going for a drive in my car fuel tank people would look at me very strangely.
Steve
Steve,
You are missing the OP's important point. Many people have been misled by imprecise writers into thinking that a "Servo" is a type of motor.
Along those lines, you described the entire universe of possible servos as if that universe only contains rotating pointers. The meaning of the word "servo" encompasses way more topics than just devices that can do that.
The OP isn't referring to the "whole servo as if it was just a motor." He is saying that while servos often contain one or more motors of one sort or another, they are not a type of motor.
If I'm understanding you correctly, earlier you were describing a servo mechanism, that probably contained some sort of electric motor. However, despite what many might think, the OP and I are pointing out that that mechanism isn't a servo-motor.
To further clarify the point, consider this, if you study types of motors, in a properly written textbook or other source, you won't find a "servo motor" type of motor. Why? Because a servo isn't a type of motor. A servo is (generally) a collection of things used to control an output, and none of those things have to be a motor, much less some specific type of electric motor.
It's common mistake, reinforced by plenty of imprecise literature and vendors' ads. The Arduino Servo library's documentation is an example of that sort of imprecise writing.