rblewitt@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (Richard Blewitt) (10/31/90)
What is the advantage of using ZIPS as apposed to SIMS for the
memory in the 3000. There must be some, because ZIPS cost more, and
Commodores philosophy is not to spend more then they have to.
Rick Blewitt
rblewittt@ucsd.edulphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (11/01/90)
In <13754@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>, rblewitt@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (Richard Blewitt) writes: >What is the advantage of using ZIPS as apposed to SIMS for the >memory in the 3000. There must be some, because ZIPS cost more, and >Commodores philosophy is not to spend more then they have to. SIMMs were too tall, and would no fit underneath the drive tray. -larry -- It is not possible to both understand and appreciate Intel CPUs. -D.Wolfskill +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (11/02/90)
lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) writes: >In <13754@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>, rblewitt@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (Richard Blewitt) writes: >>What is the advantage of using ZIPS as apposed to SIMS for the >>memory in the 3000. There must be some, because ZIPS cost more, and >>Commodores philosophy is not to spend more then they have to. >SIMMs were too tall, and would no fit underneath the drive tray. Like they couldn't have made the case a 16th of an inch taller or whatever? Or used the SIMMs that lay back at an angle like: \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ? Dave Haynie once said that the ZIPs were cheaper, but everywhere I called the SIMMs were cheaper. (I think he meant they were cheaper for CBM to purchase). Oh well, it's too late to whine about it now. So we will just have to live with it. ZIPs are coming down in price though. -- John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (11/09/90)
In article <13754@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> rblewitt@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (Richard Blewitt) writes: >What is the advantage of using ZIPS as apposed to SIMS for the >memory in the 3000. There must be some, because ZIPS cost more, and >Commodores philosophy is not to spend more then they have to. They don't cost Commodore more. They may cost you more in small numbers, simply because they're a low volume item at the local computer store relative to SIMMs. The main reasons we used them in the A3000: - High density: They take up 1/2 the space that DIPS occupy. Stand-up SIMMs are roughly as dense, lean-over SIMMs aren't. - Upward compatibility: The 256K x 4 and 1M x 4 pinouts were compatible. SIMMs can offer upward compatibility too, since pinout changes can be resolved on the SIMM PCB. DIPs weren't upward compatible, since no one had announced a 0.300" DIP in the 1M x 4 density. - Height: 1M x 4 ZIPs fit in the space under the Coprocessor slot. DIPs would have too. SIMMs are too tall, and there was nothing practical would could have done to use them in a machine as tightly packed as the 3000 -- the memory array had to go where it did. > Rick Blewitt -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy Standing on the shoulders of giants leaves me cold -REM