Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!decwrl!orc!inews!blabla!kds
From: kds@blabla.intel.com (Ken Shoemaker)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: 386SX vs 386DX
Message-ID: <1780@inews.intel.com>
Date: 13 Mar 90 15:36:42 GMT
References: <1990Feb8.223250.17994@aucs.uucp> <101@penrij.LS.COM> <572@auvax.AthabascaU.CA>
Sender: news@inews.intel.com
Reply-To: kds@blabla.UUCP (Ken Shoemaker)
Distribution: na
Organization: Santa Clara Microprocessor Division, Intel Corp., Santa Clara, CA
Lines: 8

This is really silly.  The problem described has to do with an i486 bug that
touches a bug in the Intel EISA chip set.  Both chips were designed
independently, and there certainly isn't any collaboration between the
groups to sabotage the EISA bus!  Speaking only for myself, of course...
----------
Ken Shoemaker, Microprocessor Design, Intel Corp., Santa Clara, California
csnet/arpanet: kds@mipos2.intel.com
uucp: ...{hplabs|decwrl|pur-ee|hacgate|oliveb}!intelca!mipos3!kds