Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!wasatch!utah-gr!stride!tahoe!malc
From: malc@tahoe.unr.edu (Malcolm L. Carlock)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: I thought Amiga is Amiga and IBM is IBM (was Re: Next Amiga)
Keywords: mutual exclusion?
Message-ID: <1676@tahoe.unr.edu>
Date: 3 Oct 88 17:22:43 GMT
References: <200@amgraf.UUCP>
Reply-To: malc@tahoe.unr.edu.UUCP (Malcolm L. Carlock)
Distribution: na
Organization: Univ. of Nev., Reno-Mathematics
Lines: 14

In article <200@amgraf.UUCP> huver@amgraf.UUCP (Huver) writes:
>
>The deal is that for those who do not want IBM compatiblity, the slots are
>wasted space that not even tiny, let alone great, things can be done with.

This is a good point.  Any word on a "null bridge card", allowing direct
use of the AT slots from the Amiga side?

>"Artificial Insanity is the thing for the 80's!"
> -huver	     {uunet!kitrain, plus5}!amgraf!huver

Malcolm L. Carlock
-----------------------------------------------------------------
malc@tahoe.unr.edu.UUCP		       University of Nevada, Reno