Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!rutgers!bpa!cbmvax!daveh
From: daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: A1000 + LUCAS + FRANCES + Chassis + SCSI + HD + AMAX - experience
Message-ID: <8756@cbmvax.UUCP>
Date: 29 Nov 89 16:42:01 GMT
References: <2035@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu>
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 34

in article <2035@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu>, jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright) says:
> 
> portuesi@sgi.com (Michael Portuesi) writes:
> | 	* a memory management unit.  

When I run AMAX on my A2500/30, it has a memory management unit.

> | 	  the expanded ROMS 

Currently, of course, you have to use the 128K ROMs.  There's no
obvious reason why the 256K ROMs couldn't be used with an enhanced
AMAX.  It'll be interesting to see what Apple does about this.  
There will be plenty of real Macs with '030s and 128K ROMs (like
all those accelerated Mac SEs that go faster than Mac IIxs). 
Apple could easily refuse to kick in the virtual memory aspects
of their release 7.0 OS based on older ROMs if they wanted to.  It
wouldn't be real popular, and there's no technical reason for it,
but it'll be interesting to see what they do.

> Actually, a plain ole MacII will also be obsolete by this criterion.
> But it will be easier to upgrade than AMAX--all you have to do is throw
> more money at it.  (No snide comment included...really. :-)

And '851s are cheaper than accelerator boards in any case.  Also, Apple
stands to gain a rather large piece of change swapping SE motherboards
for SE/30 boards; another reason for them to avoid accelerator support.
They're not really open, after all.

> Jim Wright
> jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu
-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Systems Engineering) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
                    Too much of everything is just enough