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