Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!csus.edu!ucdavis!deneb!s110a010
From: s110a010@deneb
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXT/Amiga Flamage: Get a life.
Summary: 8086 Crap
Message-ID: <12764@aggie.ucdavis.edu>
Date: 24 Apr 91 09:00:38 GMT
References: <6hdG18ik1@cs.psu.edu> <1748@sjfc.UUCP> <20875@cbmvax.commodore.com> <1991Apr23.201029.9844@wpi.WPI.EDU>
Sender: usenet@aggie.ucdavis.edu
Reply-To: s110a010@deneb.ucdavis.edu ()
Organization: Computing Services, UC Davis
Lines: 28

In article <1991Apr23.201029.9844@wpi.WPI.EDU> jdutka@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Dutka) writes:
>In article <20875@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:
>>IBM PC, or the eventual clones, were worth of business computing.  Any other
>>system would be written off as a game machine, or a computer for hippies, or
>>a hacker's machine, etc.
>>Now does it all make sense?
>
>Much clearer now :)
>So how can the 80486 be explained?  I can't wait (grin)
>
>-- 
>| jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu   |  Heh, heh, heh!"                                    |
>| John Dutka, Jr.      |     -Mechanical Engineers On The Prowl              |
Do you know anything about the ORIGINAL 8086 architecture?  It's a bunch
of kludges so Intel could get peak performance out of the chip since at
the time it was made, the number of transistors that could be put on the
little piece of silicon was rather small (relatively.)  While the 80486
is a very nice chip indeed, it still needs to be binary code compatible
with the 8086 and all of its wierdness.  That's how the 80486 can be
explained ;-)  The 68000 family (released about a year later) is a more
orthogonal architecture, so expanding it has been less painful than the
Intel 80X86 series.  Now put the 80486 in protected mode and it's REALLY
nice, but unfortunately DOS still operates in real mode.  So does it all
make sense?

Pat...

"I'm on the NightTrain... - G'n'R"