Re: Why not INTEL586?

Article View: comp.sys.intel

Article #30

#30

From: Tan Jin Meng
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 04:27

19 lines
958 bytes

mcastle@mcs213d.cs.umr.edu (Michael R Castle) writes:
: In article <1992Oct28.103344.18434@nuscc.nus.sg> eletanjm@nuscc.nus.sg (Tan Jin Meng) writes:
: >I can understand why INTEL would want a name for their next generation
: >processor to be trademarkable. Then why not simply use the name
: >INTEL586. Surely this has to be trademarkable.
: >
: >jin meng
: 
: 
: Because then we would have Cyrix586 and Am586 and we would be back where we
: started.

Well then, we can have PENTIUM-AMD or AMDPentium or ....

: 
: Btw, is Motorola having this problem?  ;->
: mrc

jin meng

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1992Oct30.042720.22083@nuscc.nus.sg>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!ukma!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!nuscc!eletanjm

References: <1992Oct28.230413.28960@umr.edu>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!ukma!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!nuscc!eletanjm
From: eletanjm@nuscc.nus.sg (Tan Jin Meng)
Subject: Re: Why not INTEL586?
Message-ID: <1992Oct30.042720.22083@nuscc.nus.sg>
Organization: National University of Singapore
References: <1992Oct28.230413.28960@umr.edu>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 04:27:20 GMT
Lines: 19

Reply to Parent Message