osmigo1@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan) (04/08/86)
*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** I recently received word that Motorola has been shipping approx. 30,000 68020 microprocessors a month to Apple, along with large quantities of 1-meg chips. Does anybody know what's going on? If the Mac were to evolve into a 68020-based machine, would there be compatibility problems with existing software? Ron Morgan osmigo1@ut-ngp.UUCP
mrl@oddjob.UUCP (Scott R. Anderson) (04/12/86)
In article <3179@ut-ngp.UUCP> osmigo1@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes: >I recently received word that Motorola has been shipping approx. 30,000 >68020 microprocessors a month to Apple, along with large quantities of >1-meg chips. Does anybody know what's going on? If the Mac were to evolve >into a 68020-based machine, would there be compatibility problems with >existing software? This would be in line with rumors I heard the other day about the Jonathon: a 68020-based, 2-4 Megabyte machine with a 1024^2 bitmapped screen. I'm also wondering about any compatibility problems with the larger screen. -- Scott Anderson ihnp4!oddjob!kaos!sra
ephraim@wang.UUCP (pri=8 Ephraim Vishniac x76659 ms1459) (04/14/86)
> This would be in line with rumors I heard the other day about the > Jonathon: a 68020-based, 2-4 Megabyte machine with a 1024^2 bitmapped > screen. I'm also wondering about any compatibility problems with > the larger screen. > Scott Anderson > ihnp4!oddjob!kaos!sra Only the usual problem: careless and shortsighted programmers will see their programs bomb or screw up, and programmers who followed the Apple guidelines will be OK. Ever since "day one" it's been possible to look up the screen size (width and height) and location in low memory. But when memory went from 128K to 512K, how many programs wrote the screen in the wrong place? How many won't work on the Mac XL?
ralphw@ius2.cs.cmu.edu.UUCP (04/18/86)
In article <1292@oddjob.UUCP> mrl@oddjob.UUCP (Scott R. Anderson) writes: >In article <3179@ut-ngp.UUCP> osmigo1@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes: >>I recently received word that Motorola has been shipping approx. 30,000 >>68020 microprocessors a month to Apple, along with large quantities of >>1-meg chips. Does anybody know what's going on...? If the Mac were to evolve >>into a 68020-based machine, would there be compatibility problems with >>existing software? > >This would be in line with rumors I heard the other day about the >Jonathon: a 68020-based, 2-4 Megabyte machine with a 1024^2 bitmapped >screen. I'm also wondering about any compatibility problems with >the larger screen. >-- Hopefully Jonathon will be able to do more than just run Macintosh software Unix is a likely possibility, given that Apple will want their share of the '3M' market (1 MIP, 1 Meg, 1Million pixels). Figure that Sculley means 'open Mac' in the software sense as well. Any compatibility problems should be dealt with by the programmer following the Mac guidelines for software portability. If software can run on the Mac XL/Lisa, it should be able to run on any size screen. Just out of curiosity, how does Jonathon fare in the MIPS/Screen Size comparison with Mac, assuming the 68020 runs at 15Mhz? (People say the Mac processor is nicely matched to the display resolution by this metric.) -- - Ralph W. Hyre, Jr. Internet: ralphw@c.cs.cmu.edu (cmu-cs-c.arpa) Usenet: ralphw@mit-eddie.uucp Fido: Ralph Hyre at Net 129, Node 0 (Pitt-Bull) Phone: (412)CMU-BUGS
hammen@puff.UUCP (Zaphod Beeblebrox) (04/18/86)
In article <794@wang.UUCP>, ephraim@wang.UUCP (pri=8 Ephraim Vishniac x76659 ms1459) types: > > I'm also wondering about any compatibility problems with > > the larger screen. > > Scott Anderson > > ihnp4!oddjob!kaos!sra > > Only the usual problem: careless and shortsighted programmers will see > their programs bomb or screw up, and programmers who followed the Apple > guidelines will be OK. Ever since "day one" it's been possible to look > up the screen size (width and height) and location in low memory. But > when memory went from 128K to 512K, how many programs wrote the screen > in the wrong place? How many won't work on the Mac XL? A LOT. Fortunately, most of them are demos or games. However, the one thing that is more frustrating is the fact that some programs won't let you resize a window past the edge of the normal Mac screen, which means you have about 2 inches or so of wasted space just sitting there (especially frustrating in terminal programs, where you could do an easy 132 columns if your windows could be enlarged.....) Robert J. Hammen {seismo,allegra,ihnp4,harvard,topaz}!uwvax!puff!hammen UW-Madison CS Dept. hammen@puff.wisc.edu{ UW-Madison Plasma Physics Dept. plasma%wiscpsl.bitnet {@wiscvm.wisc.edu}
mse@natmlab.UUCP (04/19/86)
In article <1292@oddjob.UUCP>, mrl@oddjob.UUCP (Scott R. Anderson) writes: > In article <3179@ut-ngp.UUCP> osmigo1@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes: > >I recently received word that Motorola has been shipping approx. 30,000 > >68020 microprocessors a month to Apple, ... > > ... > This would be in line with rumors I heard the other day about the > Jonathon ... Well, I wonder. Isn't Apple a believer in "Just-in-time" deliveries? IF such a quantity of expensive chips were going in one side of the factory, I would expect to see fancy white boxes coming out the other side, and I haven't heard of any. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the big A ("no longer a startup") has lined up some suppliers for the Jonathon. I don't like to see such unsubstantial rumors on the net. Journalists are supposed at least to quote "usually well-informed sources". Can't we do at least that well? -Martin Ewing, CSIRO Div. of Radiophysics Mail: P.O. Box 76, Epping, NSW 2121 Australia Internet: munnari!natmlab.oz!mse@seismo.CSS.GOV BITnet: mse@CITPHOBO UUCP: ...!seismo!munnari!natmlab.oz!mse Telephone: +61 2 868-0222 Telex: AA26230 ASTRO