Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!tness7!killer!elg From: elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: AT Bridgeboard, '020 Status? Message-ID: <4362@killer.UUCP> Date: 5 Jun 88 20:35:15 GMT References: <9552@g.ms.uky.edu> Organization: The Unix(R) Connection, Dallas, Texas Lines: 29 in article <9552@g.ms.uky.edu>, david@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- One of the vertebrae) says: >>As for that slower'n molasses bit, the IBM AT people are solving that with >>high-powered array processors and other custom hardware that currently isn't >>available for the Amiga. The 80286-based machines have no trouble moving 256K > um, I read recently somewhere (I read too many magazines so I have no > idea where I saw this) that Transputer boards were going to be available > for Amiga's (I suppose in a Zorro II form) along with the Helios OS. > This will match similar availability for IBM PC, Atari ST, Sun, probably > Mac II, and so forth. Perhaps you saw a paper handed out at Devcon, entitled "Transputer design concept" or something like that. Note the words "DESIGN CONCEPT" -- that is, it's just an idea, that may or may not eventually be available, depending upon whether Commodore sees any market for such a board. My thoughts on the matter: 8 Transputers (2 boards) would be handy for the graphics stuff, with appropriate programming. But I really don't relish the thought of Occam :-). On related topics, has anybody else had a CSA 68020 board for their A-2000 that made the computer SLOWER than just a plain A-2000? Sure, the one he had, had no 32-bit RAM. But still, it shouldn't have been SLOWER than a plain 68000, especially considering that most instructions complete in fewer cycles. -- Eric Lee Green ..!{ames,att,decwrl,ihnp4,mit-eddie,osu-cis}!killer!elg Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191 Lafayette, LA 70509 "Is a dream a lie if it don't come true, or is it something worse?"