Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!ritcv!cci632!ccicpg!harald
From: harald@ccicpg.UUCP ( Harald Milne)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: 68030 Questions
Message-ID: <10174@ccicpg.UUCP>
Date: 28 Jan 88 12:18:31 GMT
References: <494@.UUCP> <2044@antique.UUCP>
Organization: CCI CPD, Irvine CA
Lines: 47

In article <2044@antique.UUCP>, cjp@antique.UUCP (Charles Poirier) writes:
> In article <494@.UUCP> alex@.UUCP writes:
> >Since CSA has an '030 card coming out, (which sounds great), does anyone
> >know if the '030 boots up in a manner compatible with the '020. What I'm
> 
> A friend who works for a competitor of CSA (so apply grains of salt to
> taste) says to be wary of the CSA 68030 board.  Supposedly they did not
> do a "real" design at all, but rather used verbatim the circuit from
> Motorola's application notes that basically says "Here's how to get the
> 68030 to work exactly like a 68020."  I.e., they cripple it.  End quote.

	This wouldn't surprise me. Being 68020 compatible is a safe move,
no OS issues. That would be crippled.

/* Personal opinion follows */

	I liked the fact, that CSA persued the Amiga performance in terms of 
hardware.

	BUT, I think CSA assumes we want to pay IBM and MacII prices!

	I think CSA said, "Performance at all cost", and I think that this is a 
bad engineering decision.

	It should have been postulated, the best in price/performance ratio.
	
	Brute force, is not always a win. Especially with cost at no object,
frame of mind.

	That's why I sighed relief, seeing at least the Hurricane board.
Competition!

	And now with the A2620 from CBM, we may even achieve economy of scale!

	I'm waiting.

/* End of my bullshit opinion */

> 	Charles Poirier   (decvax,ihnp4,attmail)!vax135!cjp
> 
>    "Docking complete...       Docking complete...       Docking complete..."


-- 
Work: Computer Consoles Inc. (CCI), Advanced Development Group (ADG)
      Irvine, CA (RISCy business! Home of the CCI POWER 6/32)
UUCP: uunet!ccicpg!harald