🚀 go-pugleaf

A couple of reasons:
   1) The 80386 is simply not a very good microprocessor.  It doesn't clean
      up a lot of the junk left over by the original 8086 design, and it
      has little to offer that the 680x0 doesn't already have.  It's no
      faster than the 68020, and it's a lot slower than the 68030 and the
      88000.  The 68030 includes some mmu functions, and offers a good deal
      of function that isn't available on the 80x86.  In addition, the
      68881/68882 are substantially more powerful than their 80x86
      equivalents.
   2) One of the cornerstones of the Macintosh philosophy has been
      compatibility: everything works with everything else.  Bringing out
      an 80386 Macintosh would at the very least require two versions of
      all software, and would very likely cause major problems with
      even data portability.  Add to this the almost certain problems
      that would arise with Nubus cards designed for one processor or
      the other, and you're looking at total chaos.
   3) Macintosh software doesn't run on IBM architectures.  Never has,
      never will.  Even if it were written in 80386 native code, the PS/2
      is missing a couple hundred K of ROM.  And IBM software already
      runs on the Macintosh, under either software or hardware emulation,
      so what's the point?
   The point is, the 80386 has nothing to offer the Macintosh that it
doesn't already have, and it would destroy the universal compatibility
that Apple has struggled so hard to achieve over the last few years.
		-mattb
DISCLAIMER: my opinions are my own, not Microsoft's.

Matt Bamberger				"And priests in black gowns
(206) 882-8080				 were walking their rounds
...uw-beaver!microsoft!mattb		 And binding with briars
					 my joys and desires"