Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site x.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!frog!x!john
From: john@x.UUCP (John Woods)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: 68851 MMU ?????
Message-ID: <496@x.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 10-May-85 10:45:33 EDT
Article-I.D.: x.496
Posted: Fri May 10 10:45:33 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 12-May-85 11:16:20 EDT
References: <259@petfe.UUCP> <1277@amdcad.UUCP>
Distribution: net.micro.68k
Organization: Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA
Lines: 28

> In article <259@petfe.UUCP>, randy@petfe.UUCP (Randy Banton) writes:
> > Any comments about this statement in Electronic Design, May 5, 1985
> > on page 42 ?
> > 	"Motorola Inc.'s chip set is not yet complete and rumors
> > 	 are that the company is having problems marrying its
> > 	 future MMU with the existing 68020 CPU."
> Gee, maybe some day Motorola will catch up to Intel and integrate the
> CPU and the MMU.
> 
> expecting lots of flames on this one...
Yup:

Most manufacturers (with the exception of Intel) use the abbreviation MMU to
mean Memory Management Unit.

Intel's on-chip MMU is clearly a Memory Mismanagement Unit.

The advantage of an off-chip MMU is that customers can design their own MMU,
if they regard themselves as better at it (or understanding their needs
better).  However, there appears here a correlation between need to do so and
inability to do so......

Why did computer design cease to advance with the PDP-11 :-)?
-- 
John Woods, Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA, (617) 626-1101
...!decvax!frog!john, ...!mit-eddie!jfw, jfw%mit-ccc@MIT-XX.ARPA

"MU" said the Sacred Chao...