Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84 chuqui version 1.7 9/23/84; site nsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!amd!nsc!chuqui
From: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (The Phantom)
Newsgroups: net.micro.16k,net.micro.68k
Subject: Re: Corrigenda
Message-ID: <2393@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 25-Feb-85 02:42:45 EST
Article-I.D.: nsc.2393
Posted: Mon Feb 25 02:42:45 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 25-Feb-85 06:19:53 EST
References: <983@watdcsu.UUCP> <2385@nsc.UUCP> <730@amdcad.UUCP>
Reply-To: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (The Phantom)
Followup-To: net.micro.16k
Organization: The Paradise
Lines: 22
Xref: utcs net.micro.16k:215 net.micro.68k:595
Summary: 

In article <730@amdcad.UUCP> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes:
>But 24 bits of address is not a huge thing, which is what the 32032 has.
>24 bits is only 16 Mb or 4 4 Mb memory cards.

Only 4 4Mb cards? Sigh-- Just think of the vast numbers of Vaxes running 16
megabytes right now. Just thihk of the size of the 4 Mb cards in your 16Mb
Vax Last I looked, 16Mb was a LOT of memory, and from a cost/manufacturing
point of view, probably more than a 32000 based (or 68K system) will run
until memory costs drop and density increases. We DO have 32bit addressing
silicon on the boards and on its way to reality, and I expect it will be a
purchasable commodity long before the megabit chips that will be neccessary
to make those kind of address spaces truly useful. 32bit addressing makes a
nice marketing tool, granted, but there really isn't much that a 32bit
address gives you that a 24bit address doesn't also give you in a
manufactured product EXCEPT a marketing tool. 

chuq
-- 
From behind the eight ball:                       Chuq Von Rospach
{cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui   nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA

We'll be recording at the Paradise Friday night. Live, on the Death label.