Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!helios!bcm!rice!uw-beaver!milton!dali.cs.montana.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen
From: davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: 287 in a 386-33 system?
Message-ID: <3317@sixhub.UUCP>
Date: 1 Mar 91 00:09:16 GMT
References: <1991Feb19.080902.21887@amd.com> <15285@uudell.dell.com> <3289@sixhub.UUCP>
Reply-To: davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen)
Organization: *IX Public Access UNIX, Schenectady NY
Lines: 14

In article <3289@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:

|   Whoops! I agree that no one is providing a 287 socket anymore, but not
| because it's hard to do. 

  Well, I was at most 2/3 right on that one, Intel makes more on the 387
than the 287, so (I'm told) recent mask versions of the 386 have been
"enhanced" to require a real 387. Since I'm posting this from a machine
with a 287, obviously I have an old chip.
-- 
bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen)
    sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX
    moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me