Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!shelby!neon!pescadero.Stanford.EDU!philip
From: philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: New Macs
Message-ID: <1990Oct11.054302.14229@Neon.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 11 Oct 90 05:43:02 GMT
References: <221503@<1990Oct8> <70400068@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1990Oct10.203313.2806@eng.umd.edu>
Sender: news@Neon.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System)
Reply-To: philip@pescadero.stanford.edu
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Lines: 18

In article <1990Oct10.203313.2806@eng.umd.edu>, russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes:
|> In article <70400068@m.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
|> >
|> >Re: No FPU or 68851 in new 68020 mac.
|> >
|> >Buy one of these, wait 9 months, then (hopefully) get a 68040 upgrade
|> >for this machine.  Not only will the machine faster than a IIfx, it
|> >will have a built-in (faster) FPU and MMU.  That should solve all your
|> >problems!
|> 
|> Now why would Apple offer such a superduper upgrade for their low end machines?
|> (I'm hoping they have a II/IIx--> 040 upgrade)
Who said "Apple"? What about "third party"? One advantage of all the confusing
new variations (like has 68020 but no FPU) is developers will have to check for
these parts individually - should be good news for accelerator makers.
-- 
Philip Machanick
philip@pescadero.stanford.edu