Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!ucla-cs!sdcrdcf!psivax!nrcvax!ihm
From: ihm@nrcvax.UUCP (Ian H. Merritt)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.m68k,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Recent Motorola ad seen in Byte
Message-ID: <876@nrcvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 24-Apr-87 11:44:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: nrcvax.876
Posted: Fri Apr 24 11:44:04 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 26-Apr-87 21:41:39 EDT
References: <930@intsc.UUCP> <1517@ncr-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM>
Reply-To: ihm@minnie.UUCP (Ian Merritt)
Organization: The Frobboz Magic Microprocessor Engineering Co., Inc.
Lines: 29
Xref: mnetor comp.sys.m68k:408 comp.sys.intel:198

>In article <16294@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes:
>>
>>How did sales for the 6809 compare with the 808X family? Anyone know?
>>-- 
>
>Well, I think the 6809 sold pretty well if only because Tandy used in in
>their color computer line of little boxes.
>
>So, I would say it was pretty successful, but not so big as the 808X,
>unfortunately.
>

Unfortunately indeed.  The 6809 was just a bit too late for its
market.  Had it come out 2 years earlier, MANY things would have been
different.  It was VASTly superior to the 8080/Z80 which dominated the
8-bit market at the time.  Architecturally, it is more consistent and
generally cleaner than the x86 garbage, but limited by its 64K address
limitations.  The x86 at least expanded that slightly, albeit by a
kludgy and almost unuable mechanism.  This made a difference though in
the choice of a CPU for the MS-DOG machines. (Woof!).

Pity things have taken the low road, but I perceive a trend toward a
somewhat improved future.  Maybe I am just dreaming.

Here's to a future without Intel (or at least their current
philosophy)...

Cheerz--
					<>IHM<>