Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site oliven.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!hao!hplabs!oliveb!oliven!rap From: rap@oliven.UUCP (Robert A. Pease) Newsgroups: net.micro Subject: Re: 4->8->16->32->64? bit micros Message-ID: <764@oliven.UUCP> Date: Mon, 17-Dec-84 18:11:35 EST Article-I.D.: oliven.764 Posted: Mon Dec 17 18:11:35 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 20-Dec-84 02:29:52 EST References:<280@oakhill.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Olivetti ATC, Cupertino, Ca Lines: 19 . >It may seem logical that 64-bit architectures will eventually become dominant >since progressions have gone from 8-bit to 16-bit and then 16-bit to 32-bit. >However, I think the extension to 64-bits will not generally occur. > This reminds me of a person I talked to many years ago while working at Cromemco. I asked him if he thought 64K bit DRAMs would come out soon and he replyed that they will never make 64K bit DRAMs. Thats the maximum CPU addressing size and doesn't leave any room for ROMs. Needless to say he just had a limited idea of what might happen in the world. The point is, someone may decide to do it just for the fun of it and thats all it takes. -- Robert A. Pease {hplabs|zehntel|fortune|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!oliven!rap