Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nnews!uunet!cbmvax!daveh
From: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer Architecture question -- Daye Haynie
Message-ID: <21402@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 8 May 91 20:00:45 GMT
References: <48625@ut-emx.uucp> <#c4G!au$1@cs.psu.edu> <1991May8.042432.27636@NCoast.ORG> <1991May8.064220.13474@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 27

In article <1991May8.064220.13474@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes:

>	At this point, porting the OS to another CPU platform is
>not likely. There are so many things for CBM to do that that
>can't be high on the priority list. I'm afraid what it would do
>to the Zorro II/III standard. (Dave?)

The software overhead, and of course, the lack of object level compatibility,
would be the big problem were the Amiga to move to support of non-680x0 CPUs.

The issue of expansion bus architecture is much less of a problem.  While
Zorro II is very firmly based on the 68000 bus protocol, its existence in
the A3000 is a good indicator that we already know how to treat it in a 
"processor independent" fashion.  The interface would be more complex to a
processor that doesn't bus size, such as the 68040 or 88k, but not overly so.

The Zorro III bus doesn't assume any type of microprocessor bus, and is 32 bits
wide, plain and simple.  A bus interface device to hook any kind of 
microprocessor up to it is necessary, same as for NuBus, VME, MCA, EISA, 
Multibus, etc. though probably less complicated.

>	-- Ethan

-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
      "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M.