🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan10.032935.18316@bilver.uucp> wbeebe@bilver.uucp (Bill Beebe) writes:
>The SL chips were harder to design with and more expensive. Also, consider
>that using an SL chip provided some product differentiation over your stock
>SX or DX laptop or notebook. Many have gone down the path designing for this
>particular variant, and don't appreciate having their engineering efforts
>wiped out in one fell swoop by Intel.

Well, implementing a power-managing platform requires
implementing a power-management-tolerant platform, even if
the chip handles its own problems.

There's still room to differentiate for power management,
just as it's possible to have similar motherboards that
differ only in off-cpu cache[*], etc., and any differentiation
is worth a few bucks in the marketplace, even if it's
artificial, which in this case it wouldn't be.

				--Blair
				  "I'm allowed to talk about it
				   because I don't know a thing..."

[*] I've gone through January's Computer Shopper with a
fine-toothed felt-tip pen, and noticed that hardly anyone
offers 466DX/33 machines in both a 64k and 256k cache
configuration, though it's a toss-up which they'll implement,
and only one actually mentioned that their board can be
upgraded from 64k to 256k (they offered to do it for just
$50).