Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!lll-lcc!pyramid!nsc!grenley
From: grenley@nsc.nsc.com (George Grenley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.nsc.32k
Subject: Re: NS32000 Processor
Message-ID: <4497@nsc.nsc.com>
Date: Thu, 16-Jul-87 03:59:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: nsc.4497
Posted: Thu Jul 16 03:59:34 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 18-Jul-87 06:39:11 EDT
References: <334@forbrk.UUCP> <1026@killer.UUCP> <10192@amdahl.amdahl.com>
Reply-To: grenley@nsc.UUCP (George Grenley)
Organization: National Semiconductor, Sunnyvale
Lines: 34

In <10192@amdahl.amdahl.com> chongo@amdahl.UUCP (Landon Curt Noll) writes:
>>In article <4399@nsc.nsc.com> roger@nsc.nsc.com (Roger Thompson) writes:
>>When IBM was out searching for a micro, our CPU was stable.  What was
>>  (paraphrase, to the effect that 16032 was availble way back when)
>
>Roger, I have (sic) confused by this.  Perhaps you can explain a few things:
>
>I seem to recall a LONG LONG road from the Rev E 16032 (that could almost
>keep a Un*x kernel running) to a Rev R (that is almost bug free).  Am I
>wrong or does this conflict with your statement of ``our CPU was stable''?
>
>It seems that both Mot and Intel have done very very well even with the MMU
>problem you talk about.  The vast majority of Un*x boxes contain Mot
>or Intel CPUs.  Maybe the market place doesn't see the lack of a complete
>chip set as a big problem, or maybe there is something about the NSC chip set
>that negates this advantage?

Landon, Iguess we all know by now that you're not too fond of NSC.  So be it.
Nevertheless you should know that CPU architecture elegance is NOT the primary
reason to pick a CPU.  Look at the number of people who buy Amdahls - surely
it doesn't represent the optimum 32 bit architecture....

But seriously, folks, CPU architecture isn't the bottom line, no matter how
much us CPU types might wanna think so.   Look at the number of design wins
Intel got with the 8086 (hammered dog shit architecture) AFTER the 68000 was
in volume production - I know, I was an FAE for Intel at the time.  The 8086
family STILL sucks - but Intel's marketing whores don't - they're the best
in the business.

Still, with a good architecture AND good marketing, a chip like the '532
could surprise people.  I know, I've seen it run (tee hee hee)

Love,
George