Xref: utzoo comp.misc:2923 comp.arch:5818
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!tness7!tness1!flatline!erict
From: erict@flatline.UUCP (j eric townsend)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,comp.arch
Subject: Re: History of PCs (also kind of long)
Summary: Hey.
Keywords: history, pc, workstation
Message-ID: <1238@flatline.UUCP>
Date: 1 Aug 88 06:16:22 GMT
References: <5946@venera.isi.edu> <5458@ecsvax.uncecs.edu> <1876@looking.UUCP>
Organization: a flat near the Montrose, Houston, Tx.
Lines: 27

In article <1876@looking.UUCP>, brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
> The 6809 isn't much in use today, but it's descendants, namely the
> 68000 family, are a very strong force in microcomputers.

I guess those hundreds of thousands of Color Computers don't exist?
How about the CoCoIII:  a multitasking 8 bit machine for under $500
(that's *with* OS9, btw).  OS9 is what I wish UNIX was about half the time
I'm using UNIX.  I think that your dismissal of the 6809 (and its
variants) is unwarranted.


> The 6502 is probably in more computers than any other processor, even
> today, and though nobody knows why, Apple is still selling lots of
> machines with essentially the 6502 in them.   The 6502's children never
> really made it big, but the impression of the chip itself is firm.

Simple.  Jobs has said that when he was looking for a chip, the 6809
was really expensive, and the 6502 was really cheap.  I remember something
about Motorola saying (in a memo) that the 6502 was something cheap
to fill in the gap between the 6809 and the bottom of the chip market.
Check old issues of Byte, etc, and compare the prices of 6809s and 6502s.


-- 
Motorola Skates on Intel's Head!
J. Eric Townsend ->uunet!nuchat!flatline!erict smail:511Parker#2,Hstn,Tx,77007
             ..!bellcore!tness1!/