🚀 go-pugleaf

ajauch@ics.uci.edu (Alexander Edwin Jauch) writes:

>In article <1990Feb6.104107.11244@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us> alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes:
>>
>>Uuuuh, guys, there aren't tens of millions of Mac Pluses and SEs.  Apple
>>ain't even close to Motorola's #1 customer for ANY chip, especially
>>the 8MHz ("Now!  In this box of cereal!  A free fully-functional, 32-bit
>>microprocessor!") 68000.  Try instrument controllers, or IBM.

>IBM is the leading consumer of 68000's?  For what???  Don't they use Intels?

And nearly everyone else's.  But there are many many 68Ks around--like,
quintillions :-) in nearly everything bigger than a blender.  They're
cheaper than the alternate logic (ok, so you can't do onboard
programming --followup to net.electronics.engineering :-)

IBM, among other things, used the 68000 as the basis for the 370PC a
while back (re-microcoded, natch).  The things turn up EVERYWHERE.

>What do you work for Intel too?  The sx is almost identical to the 286 as
>far as speed and power goes.  Only really nazi companies require 386 chips.

If you don't understand why you want flat 4-gigabyte addressing, onboard memory
management, full backward compatibility and future forward
compatibility--read the discussions about the 68K versus the 020 and 030.

>>Yes, make the SE (or even Plus) cheaper, instead of a "Mac-junior".
>>It's not like the (very automated, highly admired)
>>factory can't turn them out for pennies!

>Not possible as mentioned earlier.

I won't argue with you, I will just differ with your opinions.

	Alex