Xref: utzoo comp.misc:1962 comp.sys.m68k:775 comp.sys.mac:12958 comp.sys.ibm.pc:12174
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcrware!jejones
From: jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,comp.sys.m68k,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Motorola policy
Message-ID: <603@mcrware.UUCP>
Date: 18 Feb 88 11:09:06 GMT
References: <4227@utai.UUCP> <1029@edge.UUCP> <2167@tekred.TEK.COM> <1094@oakhill.UUCP>
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Ia.
Lines: 13
Keywords: Intel IBM
Summary: Heavy on the Irony...

In article <1094@oakhill.UUCP>, hunter@oakhill.UUCP (Hunter Scales) writes:
> 
> 	The 68000 didn't end up in the IBM pc, much as we would have liked
> 	to have had it, because, as someone correctly pointed out: it wasnt
> 	available in the time frame that IBM needed and they thought that the
> 	6809 didnt have enough performance.

That would be particularly amusing, if it weren't sad, in view of the
performance of the 6809 relative to the 8088 they did use.  Arf.

[I speak only for myself, and several butchers' aprons.]

		James Jones