Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!dptg!lzaz!bds
From: bds@lzaz.ATT.COM (Bruce Szablak)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Was - Re: Xerox sues Apple!!! Now processor wars.
Message-ID: <899@lzaz.ATT.COM>
Date: 28 Dec 89 15:11:32 GMT
References: <6767@tank.uchicago.edu> <1989Dec17.112127.27333@me.toronto.edu> <3368@rti.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T BL Middletown/Lincroft NJ USA
Lines: 17

In article <3368@rti.UUCP>, bcw@rti.UUCP (Bruce Wright) writes:
> I think anyone who looks at the two processor families objectively will
> have to agree that the 68000 family is a better architecture.

I agree.

> On the other hand, this certainly doesn't mean that all software for
> the 68k is great or that all software for the 80x86 is bad.

More importantly, will my 68000 software run on a 68020, 68030, 68040 etc?
Sometimes yes, sometimes no... The real significance of the Intel chips are
that they are upwardly compatible. Anyone who got on the PC bandwagon in
the beginning has the satisfaction of being able to use their tried
and true software on faster and more powerful platforms. The consistancy
with which each generation of Intel micros maintain compatiblity while
improving over the previous generation has to instill a certain degree
of confidence in the future.