Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ucbcad.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!microsoft!uw-beaver!tektronix!ucbcad!ucbesvax.turner
From: ucbesvax.turner@ucbcad.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.arch
Subject: Re: 16k vs 68k vs 432 - (nf)
Message-ID: <1235@ucbcad.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Jan-84 03:55:08 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbcad.1235
Posted: Thu Jan  5 03:55:08 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 6-Jan-84 04:28:58 EST
Sender: notes@ucbcad.UUCP
Organization: UC Berkeley CAD Group
Lines: 21

#R:mddc:-29400:ucbesvax:27900005:000:721
ucbesvax!turner    Jan  3 23:03:00 1984

As a heuristic measure of market prominence, consider that

	the 8086 was late;
	the 68000 was very late;
	the 16000 was very, very late.

I'm not sure how the Z80000 fits into this scheme (i.e., what the
original time-to-market estimate was.)  It's also hard to say how the
iAPX 432 chipset fits in.  The micro-11 versions are probably classed
best as "totally-missed-the-boat", as is the otherwise-attractive 6809.

(I know people who claim to have seen working '286 systems; although
the chip doesn't represent much in the way of a purely architectural
advance, I wouldn't be surprised to see Bell System V Unix running on
them by May, and Berkeley 2.9 a few months later.)
---
Michael Turner (ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner)