🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <10136@cadnetix.COM>, terrell@cadnetix.COM (Eric Terrell) writes:
|  
|  What was the reaction to the announcement of the 32 bit multiply 
|  error in the 386?

  I don't think there's a correlation. The 386 (at the time the multiply
bug was found) was being primarily used for DOS, and most applications
didn't use the 32 bit instructions. The problem with the might be found
in any o/s, at least as described in the magazines.

  Personally, *if* Intel is telling us the truth, I see no problem. They
claim to have a mask revision, they say they will have it in place by
the end of the month, and they say they can still ship production
quantities this year.

  While I would not hesitatte to use one of the old 386's in a 16 bit
environment (with the machine properly labeled of course) I would not
use one of the flawed 486's for anything. I sort of hope I can persuade
Intel to give me one, even burned out if they wish, for a big hi-tech
tie tack ;-)
-- 
bill davidsen	(davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
"The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called
'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see
that the world is flat!" - anon