Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!rutgers!mailrus!ames!killer!tness7!tness1!flatline!erict
From: erict@flatline.UUCP (j eric townsend)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: History of PCs (also kind of long)
Summary: I was wrong about 6502/6809 manufacture.
Message-ID: <1261@flatline.UUCP>
Date: 5 Aug 88 03:30:35 GMT
References: <5946@venera.isi.edu> <5458@ecsvax.uncecs.edu> <1876@looking.UUCP> <676@buengc.BU.EDU>
Organization: a flat near the Montrose, Houston, Tx.
Lines: 19

In article <1238@flatline.UUCP>, I stick my foot in my mouth:
>
>[...]  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.

Gads.  I can't believe I said that.  I've had 6502/10s around for years.
They all say MOS on them.  That's not Motorola, at least the last
time I checked.  I got some email that may explain my confusion.
The sender claimed that the 6502/10 was the product of some
ex-Motorola engineers.  I find that rather easy to believe.

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