Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!uw!dnanian From: dnanian@uw.com (Dave Nanian) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: 88110 rumors Message-ID: <1991Jun16.193021.2051@uw.com> Date: 16 Jun 91 19:30:21 GMT References: Sender: dnanian@uw.com Reply-To: dnanian@uw.com (Dave Nanian) Organization: UnderWare, Inc. Lines: 16 In article scott@mcs-server.gac.edu (Scott Hess) writes: > :-). Seriously, though, there _will_ be a machine with 3x performance > (be it an 88000-base or 68040 running at 96.5Mhz), and those who > haven't kept up will be hung out to dry, in one way or another. Perhaps I'm just being ignorant of the real issues here, but wouldn't it be possible to put an 88110 and a 68040 on the board, with the 88110 for "new" stuff and the 68040 for "backward compatibility"? That way, all the old software would just work on the new machine. I don't know much about Mach, but if it can multiprocess, perhaps it can do it with different chips, based on something in the executable header that says what the executable is compiled for. --Dave Nanian, UnderWare, Inc. (dnanian@uw.com, uunet!uw!dnanian, NeXT Mail Preferred)