Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!panda!genrad!decvax!ucbvax!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!jack!man!crash!billd
From: billd@crash.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Comments on future ASDG products (68020)
Message-ID: <969@crash.CTS.COM>
Date: Thu, 2-Apr-87 12:02:48 EST
Article-I.D.: crash.969
Posted: Thu Apr  2 12:02:48 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 4-Apr-87 17:46:46 EST
References: <6043@amdahl.UUCP> <276@mcdsun.UUCP>
Reply-To: billd@crash.CTS.COM (Bill D'Camp)
Organization: Crash TS, El Cajon, CA
Lines: 31
Keywords: 68020 ASDG MMU cooperation future


[]

Fred,

Something I wonder about with all this talk of standard versus
custom MMU's, if the standard MMU for the '020 is so great, how
come none of the companies making '020 boxes use it?  From what I've
gathered by talking with people from Sun, SGI, and Masscomp, to name 
a few, they all use custom MMUs because there is a SIGNIFICANT penalty
involved in using the standard chip.  Is this correct, or is it just
an excuse to limit software portability?

Any personal opinions on this issue, I don't expect you to speak for
Motorola, but I'm sure that there is a lot of interest if you could
get an official reading from.

-- 
    _   /|
    \`o_O'
      ( )    Aachk! Phft!
       U

(serious self-portrait?)

Opinion?  I thought you said onions.


UUCP:	{akqua,hplabs!hp-sdd,sdcsvax,nosc}crash!billd
ARPA:	crash!billd@nosc
INET:	billd@crash.CTS.COM