[net.micro.mac] 68020 shipments to Apple

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