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