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