Re: DSP: It's about time for the 96002

Article View: comp.sys.next.misc

Article #1755

Back to comp.sys.next.misc Previous Next

#1755

From: James Uther
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1992 04:49

3 lines
556 bytes

The 96002 costs an order of magnitude more than the 56001. (as of the end of
last year, anyway). Could NeXT do it?
	james

Technical Details

Message-ID: <4711@cluster.cs.su.oz.au>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!metro!cluster!orthanc!jimu

References: <1992Apr16.180415.26582@cs.ucla.edu>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!metro!cluster!orthanc!jimu
From: jimu@orthanc.cs.su.oz.au (James Uther)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.misc
Subject: Re: DSP: It's about time for the 96002
Keywords: dsp 56001 96002
Message-ID: <4711@cluster.cs.su.oz.au>
Date: 18 Apr 92 04:49:57 GMT
References: <1992Apr16.180415.26582@cs.ucla.edu>
Sender: news@cluster.cs.su.oz.au
Reply-To: jimu@orthanc.cs.su.oz.au (James Uther)
Lines: 3

Reply to Parent Message