Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!rpi!nyser!rodan!rodan.acs.syr.edu!cwebster
From: cwebster@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Chris Webster)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: i486 machines
Message-ID: <1263@rodan.acs.syr.edu>
Date: 7 Nov 89 23:35:08 GMT
Sender: cwebster@rodan.acs.syr.edu
Reply-To: cwebster@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Chris Webster)
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Lines: 24


   First of all, about the problem with 486 chips: I recall reading precisely
   what the problem was, but I can't remember where.  Since it evidently wasn't
   on here, it must've been in a magazine.  Since the only technical magazine
   (only because it's the  only computing magazine that I read :) is BYTE, I
   assume that it was mentioned in the latest issue.  The problem occurs
   when a certain instruction is executed after another certain instruction.
   If there isn't enough time or other instructions executed between them, it
   doesn't work right.  (Sorry, but that's as technical as I can be.)

   In today's Science Times section of the NEW YORK TIMES, one of the PComputingcolumns was devoted to a review of yesterday's Compaq press conference. (Today
   is Nov 7th, for those of you who don't get this on the same day.) They
   mentioned the two new Compaq i486 machines, but unfortunately in not great
   detail.  Just hype; they even quoted someone on the floor as saying "poor
   ibm".  Evidently the higher end model sits on the floor (sounded to me
   like a tower configuration AT) and can have  2 i486's or 2 386's, or 
   combinations of both combos in it.  For $15grand and up, it outperforms
   minicomputers.  (Any one have reliable technical info?)   Evidently, the
   problems with the chip have been worked out, since suppossively (according
   to the Net) Compaq found the problems.

   Disclaimer:  I'm only an Undergrad, so my opinions do not reflect those
   of Syracuse University.   They make too much sense for the administration
   to agree with.  :-)