Re: Re: Re: Recent Motorola ad seen in Byte

Article View: comp.sys.intel

Article #1594

#1594

From: Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1987 20:30

16 lines
1566 bytes

In article <615@mipos3.UUCP> kds@mipos3.UUCP (Ken Shoemaker ~) writes:
:
:of course, if Mot stopped making all of those 680?0 processors compatible with
:the 6800, I guess that you might have an argument.  What is that I hear you
:say?  The 68000 isn't compatible with the 6800?  Gee, I guess Intel will
:just have to call back all the 80?86s that run 8080 code, which is exactly
:0 of them.  Blah, blah, blah...Now NEC seems to have picked up the ball by
:making their V20 and V30 run 8080 code in addition to the 8086 code, if
:that is what you really want...

Does this mean that Intel now accepts the V20 and V30 processors?????

While we're talking about COMPATIBILITY, when will that 386 chip
drop-in replacement for the 286 (described in PC-WEEK and elsewhere)
be available to rescue 286 boxes from obsolesence?   How fast a clock
rate will it accept?

Technical Details

Message-ID: <525@omen.UUCP>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!reed!omen!caf

References:

<362@sbcs.UUCP> <930@intsc.UUCP> <1517@ncr-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <932@intsc.UUCP> <3441@gitpyr.gatech.EDU> <615@mipos3.UUCP>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!reed!omen!caf
From: caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Recent Motorola ad seen in Byte
Message-ID: <525@omen.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 22-Apr-87 15:30:58 EST
Article-I.D.: omen.525
Posted: Wed Apr 22 15:30:58 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 25-Apr-87 00:04:01 EST
References: <362@sbcs.UUCP> <930@intsc.UUCP> <1517@ncr-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <932@intsc.UUCP> <3441@gitpyr.gatech.EDU> <615@mipos3.UUCP>
Reply-To: caf@.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Omen Technology Inc, Portland Oregon
Lines: 16

Reply to Parent Message