Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!news.funet.fi!tut!mt87692 From: mt87692@tut.fi (Mikko Tsokkinen) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware Subject: Re: Amiga 3500/4000? Message-ID: Date: 5 Sep 90 14:04:56 GMT References: <6212@hub.ucsb.edu> <1990Sep4.134613.11940@cbnewsc.att.com> <27467@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> Sender: news@funet.fi (#News ) Organization: Tampere University of Technology Lines: 29 In-Reply-To: navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU's message of 4 Sep 90 17:54:28 GMT > >This is pure speculation on my part but..... > >I was reading an article that said that the 68040 was a single chip > >that contained both the Math coprocessor and the "regular" processor > >in one unit. Because of this, the 68040 actually costs less to make > >and will probably cost less to buy from motorola that a 68030 and the > >matching math chip. > I'm sure that in the short run, this will not be true. > >The rest is a marketing decision. > Speaking of marketing decisions, how about a slew of better naming conventions? > The numbering scheme is getting slightly awkward... For example, for that new > 24 bit color machine, with hi-res monochrome display capability (for that > programmer in us all...) how about the Amiga Ranger :) > Just my opinion. Excuse me but why do you have to have 68040 in your machine when most of people are quite happy with 68000. Especially if you allready have A3000. What to do you with more speed? Compared to price you pay for it (68040 $800). Just my $0.02. MIT -- Mikko "Assembler rules OK!" Tsokkinen Internet mt87692@tut.fi : UUCP tut!mt87692 : Bitnet mt87692@fintut