On Sat, Nov 16, 2024, 3:14 PM Jon Elson via cctalk
wrote:
> They SHOULD have started with a clean sheet, of course.
I guess the iAPX 432 wasn't sufficiently "clean sheet" :-)
On 11/16/24 15:43, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
Think of how much better the state of the microprocessor
would be IBM had chosen the 68000 Linear Architecture
rather than the 8086 Segment:Offset with separate I/O
instructions and only 1 interrupt architecture.
I don't mean to start a huge arch
On Sat, Nov 16, 2024, 3:48 PM Mike Katz wrote:
> The IAPX432 came out the same year that the IBM PC came out which was 3
> years after the 8086
I'm fairly sure design work on the 432 began first.
On 11/16/24 16:24, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> So, Intel went with the "quick fix" rather than the long-term good.
Okay, I vass dere and know what we were being told by Intel marketing in
the late 70s. The 8086 was not intended to be the eventual migration
target for larger-scale applications
In order to have the "world beat a path" to a new microprocessor is has
the be sufficiently better than what is there to justify the time and
expense. Intel doesn't know how to architect a decent CPU. They just
keep kludging their previous successes.
From what I heard from some inside source
Because the majority of buyers were businesses. - they nearly always
choose the low risk, low reward option.
Only people with vision look forward.
On Sun, 17 Nov 2024, 01:56 Wayne S via cctalk,
wrote:
> Why did those processors not catch on?
> It seems to me that hardware people had a “if we
Why did those processors not catch on?
It seems to me that hardware people had a “if we build it, they will come”
mentality and hoped other companies would adopt it and actually write software
to make it useful.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 16, 2024, at 17:38, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
> wrote:
It didn't hurt that when IBM decide to go with the 8088 they bought
something like 12.5% of Intel's stock.
On 11/16/2024 7:37 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 11/16/24 16:24, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
So, Intel went with the "quick fix" rather than the long-term good.
Okay, I vass de
Was just me or did everyone think 32K words was all a single process
needed in the 70's?
Start with 4K and use paging to give you 32K 12 bit words. Welcome to
the PDP-8 world!!!
Wow you could be running in one 4K field and have your data in another
4K field. Amazing!
And all core me
On 2024-11-16 2:43 p.m., Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
Think of how much better the state of the microprocessor would be IBM
had chosen the 68000 Linear Architecture rather than the 8086
Segment:Offset with separate I/O instructions and only 1 interrupt
architecture.
I don't mean to start a hug
> On Nov 16, 2024, at 4:24 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> The Mac was released with MacWrite and MacPaint; how long was it before a
> spreadsheet program and other word processors were available?
>
Not to take away from the main thrust of your argument, which is sound, but…
Micros
/So, Intel went with the "quick fix" rather than the long-term good.
<-- Grumpy Old Fred
/And the world has been putting up with that decision with hardware and
software that have gotten klugier and klugier as time goes on.
The 6809 was amazing with what could be done with a random logic 8-b
The IAPX432 came out the same year that the IBM PC came out which was 3
years after the 8086 and 2 years after the 68000.
It was slow and clunky compared to the 68000 and the 8086 was firmly
entrenched in the IBM-PC.
The 8086 used an extension of the very familiar 8080 instruction set and
th
On Sat, 16 Nov 2024, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
Think of how much better the state of the microprocessor would be IBM had
chosen the 68000 Linear Architecture rather than the 8086 Segment:Offset with
separate I/O instructions and only 1 interrupt architecture.
I don't mean to start a huge arc
Think of how much better the state of the microprocessor would be IBM
had chosen the 68000 Linear Architecture rather than the 8086
Segment:Offset with separate I/O instructions and only 1 interrupt
architecture.
I don't mean to start a huge architecture argument so please don't flame me.
On
On 11/16/24 12:09, Sid Jones via cctalk wrote:
Purely as a matter of interest, my first hands-on
code-cutting experience with a microprocessor, an 8008,
was at a Swansea University seminar in November 1974...
Where does the off half-century go?
Yup, on my first real job, I did the controller
Purely as a matter of interest, my first hands-on code-cutting experience
with a microprocessor, an 8008, was at a Swansea University seminar in
November 1974...
Where does the off half-century go?
Regards
Sid Jones
-Original Message-
From: Murray McCullough via cctalk
Sent: Saturd
17 matches
Mail list logo
