geoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning) (11/08/84)
>Obviously he was discussing only *real* chips, not vaporware. Well, I >may be insulting HP -- I'm not sure about their chips -- but the others >you mention are all in the Real Soon Now category. With chip manufacturers, >Real Soon Now often means Maybe Someday. > Henry Spencer Gee, the info I have is that Sun has had a 68020 for months now. I would look for them to intro a 68020 board at Comdex next week, myself. -- Geoff Kuenning First Systems Corporation ...!ihnp4!trwrb!desint!geoff
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (11/11/84)
> Gee, the info I have is that Sun has had a 68020 for months now. I would > look for them to intro a 68020 board at Comdex next week, myself. Have they had production quantities running at 16+ MHz? I doubt it. And product announcements mean nothing (that's what my comment was all about, dammit!); it's deliveries that count. And I would suspect that Sun may well be on Motorola's "favored customers, get samples early" list. [Disclaimer: I have no experience with Sun's marketing practices. They may well be one of the few companies that don't announce something until they are ready to deliver it.] Actually, I'm told that the 68020 is well into the process of moving from vaporware to real hardware, so I may (repeat, may) have been slamming it unfairly. But the FPP and MMU for it are still vaporware, and that's a major black mark. -- Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry
jss@sjuvax.UUCP (Jonathan Shapiro) (11/22/84)
[Aren't you hungry...?] > Gee, the info I have is that Sun has had a 68020 for months now. I would > look for them to intro a 68020 board at Comdex next week, myself. I have heard that some folks got preliminary specs on the 68020 and shipped them out to a commercial equivalent of the Stanford Fast Turnaround Lab. What they got back was a perfect 68020 emulator based on a risc chip -- right down to the cycle timings, and apparently the thing ran better than the real chip. Apparently these folks marketed what they claimed was a 68020 board with the ersatz edition until the real one came along. The catch was that the ersatz edition came out able to run at 24 Mhz.... Well, it looked like a 68020, it felt like a 68020, it tested like a 68020, it tasted like a 68020... must have been a 68020? Jon Shapiro
padpowell@wateng.UUCP (PAD Powell) (11/24/84)
Being somewhat in the business of building hardware, I simply do no
believe that a single board (Multibus/SBI/whatever) emulator of a 68020
is feasible. Couple of boards, using ECL, and VERY clever people, yes.
24MHz, possible...
Patrick ("ECL, say it slowly... speed kills...") Powelldavet@oakhill.UUCP (Dave Trissel) (11/27/84)
In article <671@sjuvax.UUCP> jss@sjuvax.UUCP (Jonathan Shapiro) writes: >[Aren't you hungry...?] > >> Gee, the info I have is that Sun has had a 68020 for months now. I would >> look for them to intro a 68020 board at Comdex next week, myself. > > I have heard that some folks got preliminary specs on the 68020 and >shipped them out to a commercial equivalent of the Stanford Fast Turnaround >Lab. What they got back was a perfect 68020 emulator based on a risc chip >-- right down to the cycle timings, and apparently the thing ran better >than the real chip. Apparently these folks marketed what they claimed was >a 68020 board with the ersatz edition until the real one came along. The >catch was that the ersatz edition came out able to run at 24 Mhz.... > > Well, it looked like a 68020, it felt like a 68020, it tested like a >68020, it tasted like a 68020... must have been a 68020? > >Jon Shapiro ...and purple cows fly to the moon every night at 10:04:27 GMT. Motorola Semiconductor Products Sincerely, Austin, Texas David Trissel
reid@Glacier.ARPA (11/29/84)
> I have heard that some folks got preliminary specs on the 68020 and > shipped them out to a commercial equivalent of the Stanford Fast Turnaround > Lab. What they got back was a perfect 68020 emulator based on a risc chip > -- right down to the cycle timings, and apparently the thing ran better > than the real chip. Apparently these folks marketed what they claimed was > a 68020 board with the ersatz edition until the real one came along. The > catch was that the ersatz edition came out able to run at 24 Mhz.... > > Well, it looked like a 68020, it felt like a 68020, it tested like a > 68020, it tasted like a 68020... must have been a 68020? > > Jon Shapiro I am the resident computer scientist in the Stanford Fast Turnaround Laboratory, and I can assure you that (a) There is no commercial equivalent of the SUFTAL. Our brand of chaos is unique. (b) Nowhere on planet earth is there a 68020 emulator based on a risc chip that runs anywhere close to exact cycle timings. I would be completely amazed if there was a 68020 emulator based on a risc chip that ran at any speed at all--it's such a dumb idea. (c) Anybody who has the technology to take the "preliminary specs" for a commercial chip and ship them out for fab and get a working part back before the commercial chip is available is not going to waste that technology on 68020's. If I had such a technology I would probably try to trade it for a few million shares of Motorola stock, or perhaps for the privilege of filling my pickup truck with Krugerrands. I recommend strongly that you locate a new rumormonger. Your current rumormonger is feeding you jokes and convincing you that they are rumors. Brian Reid Reid@Glacier.ARPA decwrl!glacier!reid