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?"