Article View: comp.sys.intel
Article #36Re: why not i586
From: Gerald Walls
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 18:56
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 18:56
10 lines
987 bytes
987 bytes
In article <1992Oct29.181700.7121@ichips.intel.com> rminemie@sedona.intel.com (Ronald Minemier) writes: >i586 and intel586 are names that could be trademarked. one of the issues >is that some other company can also tradmark a name like xxx586xxx > >this could be a problem to customers because the two parts may not >actually be the same thing...close but not the same...most companies >like their customers to get exactly what they already think they are >getting. like the 486SX and 487SX?
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Oct30.185605.8480@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!ogicse!uwm.edu!src.honeywell.com!The-Star.honeywell.com!saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com!wallsReferences:
<1992Oct29.181700.7121@ichips.intel.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!ogicse!uwm.edu!src.honeywell.com!The-Star.honeywell.com!saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com!walls From: walls@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com (Gerald Walls) Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel Subject: Re: why not i586 Message-ID: <1992Oct30.185605.8480@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com> Date: 30 Oct 92 18:56:05 GMT Article-I.D.: saifr00.1992Oct30.185605.8480 References: <1992Oct29.181700.7121@ichips.intel.com> Organization: Honeywell Air Transport Systems Division Lines: 10