Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!rlgvax!guy
From: guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.arch,net.micro.16k,net.micro.68k
Subject: Re: 24 bit vs. 32 bit address space
Message-ID: <540@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Mar-85 18:38:59 EST
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.540
Posted: Fri Mar  1 18:38:59 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 3-Mar-85 03:48:45 EST
References: <983@watdcsu.UUCP> <2385@nsc.UUCP> <730@amdcad.UUCP> <2393@nsc.UUCP> <295@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA> <73@daisy.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 11
Xref: watmath net.arch:899 net.micro.16k:237 net.micro.68k:624

> Chip designers have to make many trade-offs.  It appears that National chose 
> speed-to-market and manufacturability..  Motorola chose prettiness.

I don't know when the 320xx and the 68012 came to market, but Motorola is
already making chips which support 32-bit addressing, namely the 68012
(same underlying chip as the 68010, but not in the same 68000-compatible
DIP package).  (Just to make sure it works, I "telnet"ted to a 68012-based
machine upstairs; it does.)

	Guy Harris
	{seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy