🚀 go-pugleaf

I can't speak for Intel, and none of this should be taken as the opinion
of Intel, but...

...Motorola's "announcement" came in the same week that they chided
Intel for the 386's non-availability; the week that Compaq introduced
their box.  Compaq must have gotten at least a few from us, since they
seem to have filled the channels of distribution pretty well, or at least
out here Computerland seems to have it, and Fry's is advertising it
(for a discount!) in their newspaper ads.

To put things in a historical sense, Motorola held the same kind of blitz
a few months after Intel came out with the 286, describing the 68020,
the 68881(?) floating point unit, and the whatever-the-number-is paged
MMU, all well before their general availiblity, or even their first
silicon.  I suppose that Intel should feel flattered in that it seems
to me that Mot, in each case, has conceeded defeat: the 68010 to the
286, the 68020 to the 386, and that in order to maintain any kind of
market share, they have to have a media blitz, rolling out their newest,
half baked, family jewels.  Its all pretty comic!

And what about the new family jewels?  Should I feel vindicated that Mot
has finally decided that on-chip memory management is a good idea?  And
what about performance?  Why would a new, ultra-high end user choose
the 68030 over, say, the Clipper, or the MIPS chips, each of which
(if you believe the numbers) should exceed the 68030's performance (with
the promise of delivering more sooner) and are available, in some semblance, 
today?
-- 
The above views are personal.

I've seen the future, I can't afford it...

Ken Shoemaker, Microprocessor Design, Intel Corp., Santa Clara, California
uucp: ...{ hplabs|amdcad|qantel|pur-ee|scgvaxd|oliveb }!intelca!mipos3!kds
csnet/arpanet: kds@mipos3.intel.com