Xref: utzoo comp.misc:1756 comp.sys.m68k:694 comp.sys.mac:11519 comp.sys.ibm.pc:10992
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!sdcsvax!nosc!humu!uhccux!todd
From: todd@uhccux.UUCP (The Perplexed Wiz)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,comp.sys.m68k,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: The New Chips
Keywords: Intel IBM
Message-ID: <1481@uhccux.UUCP>
Date: 28 Jan 88 06:50:32 GMT
References: <4746@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <1430@husc2.UUCP> <4227@utai.UUCP>
Reply-To: todd@uhccux.UUCP (The Perplexed Wiz)
Organization: U. of Hawaii, Manoa (Honolulu)
Lines: 23

In article <4227@utai.UUCP> tjhorton@ai.UUCP (Timothy J. Horton) writes:
>>IBM is sticking with the Intel line, so the 80386 will (probably be
>>better) than the 68020.
>
>IBM used the 80xx stuff because they owned Intel.  Considering that they
>owned the company, and the 802xx stuff was coming out around then, you
>think they would have looked at the specs and built the PC to move in

I think you may have things a bit backwards here.   As I recall, IBM chose
the Intel 8088 over the Motorola 68K because the support chips and 8-bit
bus for the 8088 was cheaper and more plentiful.  IBM started buying large
chunks of Intel after they started building the PC, not the other way
around.  Moreover, IBM recently sold off large chunks of Intel stock.  A
number of analysts said that the reason IBM bought into Intel years ago was
to insure that Intel stayed in business and therefore able to supply chips
to IBM.  Since IBM now seems to believe that Intel can run on their own
without a big blue life support, they sold off a lot of Intel stock.

-- 
Todd Ogasawara, U. of Hawaii Faculty Development Program
UUCP:		{ihnp4,uunet,ucbvax,dcdwest}!sdcsvax!nosc!uhccux!todd
ARPA:		uhccux!todd@nosc.MIL		BITNET: todd@uhccux
INTERNET:	todd@uhccux.UHCC.HAWAII.EDU