jpc@fct.unl.pt (Jose Pina Coelho) (03/15/91)
In article <7724@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes: > > [...] A particular large university I know (which will remain unnamed) is > so pissed at NeXT that they are ready to have a NeXT-bashing party. > Literally. [...] Is it an open party ? (God knows I never miss a party) Please send address and details. -- Jose Pedro T. Pina Coelho | BITNET/Internet: jpc@fct.unl.pt Rua Jau N 1, 2 Dto | UUCP: ...!mcsun!unl!jpc 1300 Lisboa, PORTUGAL | Home phone: (+351) (1) 640767 - If all men were brothers, would you let one marry your sister ?
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (03/17/91)
In article <7724@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes:
[ whole bunches of lines on the NeXT's availability deleted]
A small price to pay for getting a chip (the 68040) fresh onto the
market in a computer. Quite a few people ordered the new NeXT. Who
can complain. However, I think Motorola is getting up to speed on on
040 production. So, maybe the Amiga 4000 will be out in a year or
two. For now, Amiga users can always pay for an Amiga 3000 then spend
another $1500(or whatever it costs) to upgrade to the 040.
-Mike
BTW: It feels good knowing that Word Perfect 5.0 runs on the NeXT.
How's Commodore doing in getting software companies to take them
seriously?rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (03/17/91)
In article <oo2Gzzh11@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <7724@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes: > > [ whole bunches of lines on the NeXT's availability deleted] > >A small price to pay for getting a chip (the 68040) fresh onto the >market in a computer. Quite a few people ordered the new NeXT. Who >can complain. However, I think Motorola is getting up to speed on on >040 production. So, maybe the Amiga 4000 will be out in a year or >two. For now, Amiga users can always pay for an Amiga 3000 then spend >another $1500(or whatever it costs) to upgrade to the 040. It won't cost that much. In fact, it'll probably cost well under $900 since I've seen 3 Amiga vendors quote $995 list for their 040 boards when they ship. >-Mike > >BTW: It feels good knowing that Word Perfect 5.0 runs on the NeXT. It feels good that AT&T Unix runs on an A3000. >How's Commodore doing in getting software companies to take them >seriously? It's not a matter of taking the Amiga seriously, it's a matter of paying their development fees. Lotus would be glad to port their products to the Amiga for about $15 mill. I'm willing to bet more copies of Word Perfect were sold on the Amiga than the total number of NeXT machines sold. How did NeXT get all those major packages ported when the # of NeXT owners only number in the 10s of thousands? The answer is $$$ plain and simple. If I were a developer faced with a choice of porting to the Amiga or porting to the NeXT, I'd port to the Amiga simply because the user base is about 2 orders of magnitude bigger. Only one thing could change my mind, and that would be if someone offered me a large sum of money to port to the smaller market. Hell, if the sum was large enough, I'd port it to the CBM Pet computer. Money talks, I just wish Commodore would raise it's voice a little.
nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen) (03/17/91)
In article <1991Mar17.031448.26855@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >>In article <7724@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes: >> >> [ whole bunches of lines on the NeXT's availability deleted] >> >> >>BTW: It feels good knowing that Word Perfect 5.0 runs on the NeXT. >It feels good that AT&T Unix runs on an A3000. > >>How's Commodore doing in getting software companies to take them >>seriously? > >It's not a matter of taking the Amiga seriously, it's a matter of >paying their development fees. Lotus would be glad to port their >products to the Amiga for about $15 mill. > Don't know about Word Perfect, but I think it might be worth it for Commodore to pay Lotus to port Improv from NEXT, or Microsoft to make Word instead of spending the money to advertise in magazines or newspapers. Just having these programs will sell the machines. Right now if I want to write proposals or research some papers, I am forced to use Amax on my 3000. There is no productivity software for the Amiga (period)!
cs326ag@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Loren J. Rittle) (03/17/91)
In article <27E3053E.1145@orion.oac.uci.edu> nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen) writes: >Don't know about Word Perfect, but I think it might be worth it for Commodore >to pay Lotus to port Improv from NEXT, or Microsoft to make Word instead of >spending the money to advertise in magazines or newspapers. Just having >these programs will sell the machines. I won't comment on this as I could care less whether or not Lotus or Microsoft port their latest and greatest products to the Amiga. If C= has to pay large sums of money, then I have to disagree, as C= has many other area (like RTG) that need to have large sums of money thrown at :-). >Right now if I want to write proposals or research some papers, I am forced to >use Amax on my 3000. There is no productivity software for the Amiga (period)! This comment about `no productivity software' is utter BS of the first degree. CED/ISpell/AmigaTeX tied together with ARexx makes for one hell of a `productive environment' for writing proposals or research papers. Methinks you have not seen all the tools on the Amiga that I have. I also like ProVector for making drawing for my research papers. While ProVector is quite new and still not perfect, I think it is a wonderful product. The step between ProDraw I and II is about the same as the step from ProDraw II to ProVector. Just the fact that it has UNDO functions and a full ARexx interface make it leaps and bounds better than what Gold Disk has to offer. Gold Disk has been very against (1) adding UNDO and ARexx support to their product(s). I won't buy another one till they reverse this trend and I suggest you do the same. IMHO, programs without an ARexx interface (a complete one, not a lame on, as in AmigaVision), should be upgraded now! As the end user gains a lot of POWER for so little work (on the part of the developer). I have gotten off track, so I will stop talking :-0. (1) they have said this on BIX (over the last summer). Loren J. Rittle -- ``NewTek stated that the Toaster *would* *not* be made to directly support the Mac, at this point Sculley stormed out of the booth...'' --- A scene at the recent MacExpo. Gee, you wouldn't think that an Apple Exec would be so worried about one little Amiga device... Loren J. Rittle l-rittle@uiuc.edu
rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (03/18/91)
In article <27E3053E.1145@orion.oac.uci.edu> nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen) writes: >In article <1991Mar17.031448.26855@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: > >>It's not a matter of taking the Amiga seriously, it's a matter of >>paying their development fees. Lotus would be glad to port their >>products to the Amiga for about $15 mill. >> > >Don't know about Word Perfect, but I think it might be worth it for Commodore >to pay Lotus to port Improv from NEXT, or Microsoft to make Word instead of >spending the money to advertise in magazines or newspapers. Just having >these programs will sell the machines. > >Right now if I want to write proposals or research some papers, I am forced to >use Amax on my 3000. There is no productivity software for the Amiga (period)! Oh bull. There are plenty of Word Processor and DTP programs for the Amiga. They jusr aren't as easy to use (in Mac user's opinions) as MS Word, etc. You could still get work done you'd just have to read the manual and learn how to use the program. Lotus is another one of those greedy companies trying to copyright look-and-feel. I wouldn't want Commodore to pay millions just to port a single piece of software., -- /~\_______________________________________________________________________/~\ |n| rjc@albert.ai.mit.edu Amiga, the computer for the creative mind. |n| |~| .-. .-. |~| |_|________________________________| |_| |________________________________|_|
jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi (03/18/91)
In article <1991Mar17.031448.26855@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: > In article <oo2Gzzh11@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >>How's Commodore doing in getting software companies to take them >>seriously? > > It's not a matter of taking the Amiga seriously, it's a matter of > paying their development fees. Lotus would be glad to port their > products to the Amiga for about $15 mill. > (Note, I am reading between the lines...) Uhh?! Lotus _ported_ Improv to NeXT? From where? To my knowledge, Improv was _developed_ on NeXT platform. I have heard that they tried to program Improv before, for O/S 2 or something else. But only after they started to program on NeXT they could really make a working product out of that... Better check your points. Jouni Alkio, Helsinki, Finland
rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (03/18/91)
In article <1991Mar17.202827.5577@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes: >In article <1991Mar17.031448.26855@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >> In article <oo2Gzzh11@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> >>>How's Commodore doing in getting software companies to take them >>>seriously? >> >> It's not a matter of taking the Amiga seriously, it's a matter of >> paying their development fees. Lotus would be glad to port their >> products to the Amiga for about $15 mill. >> > >(Note, I am reading between the lines...) >Uhh?! Lotus _ported_ Improv to NeXT? From where? To my knowledge, Improv >was _developed_ on NeXT platform. I have heard that they tried to >program Improv before, for O/S 2 or something else. But only after they >started to program on NeXT they could really make a working product out >of that... > >Better check your points. > Jouni Alkio, Helsinki, Finland You read too much in between the lines. I never said anything about Improv. I've never used it, nor do I know anything about it. I was talking about Lotus products in general. Software companies would be glad to port software to the Amiga, at the right price. Hell, I bet Apple would port Quickdraw to the Amiga if Commodore licensed it and paid Apple a few hundred million. (yea, Apple is greedy.) -- /~\_______________________________________________________________________/~\ |n| rjc@albert.ai.mit.edu Amiga, the computer for the creative mind. |n| |~| .-. .-. |~| |_|________________________________| |_| |________________________________|_|
nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen) (03/18/91)
In article <1991Mar17.160633.9512@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >In article <27E3053E.1145@orion.oac.uci.edu> nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen) writes: >>In article <1991Mar17.031448.26855@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >> >>Right now if I want to write proposals or research some papers, I am forced to >>use Amax on my 3000. There is no productivity software for the Amiga (period)! > > Oh bull. There are plenty of Word Processor and DTP programs for the Amiga. >They jusr aren't as easy to use (in Mac user's opinions) as MS Word, etc. I have WordPerfect, Pen Pal, Pro Write 3.1, Pro Draw 2.0, Pro Page2, Page Stream 2.0, Pro Vector2.0 (pretty good), etc.... No simple programs like MathType, Cricket Graph! >You could still get work done you'd just have to read the manual and learn >how to use the program. Of course, you can do most of the stuffs on the Amiga, but the productivity goes away when you have to use tricks. Have you ever seen how slow ProPage2.0 and Page Stream 2.0 on the A3000 compared to PageMaker on SE/30? PakeMaker 4.0 just came out for windows and it ran really fast on my 386. I am not trying to bash the Amiga. I am an Amiga Fanatic. I still have my A1000 that I got in '86. But after 5 years, I haven't really seen that many programs comparable to other systems. Question!? Are there any Amiga word processors that let you insert tables, and structured drawings in the document? Haven't checked out AmigaTEX though! What about spreadsheets, and databases! Haven't found a spreadsheet that is comparable to EXCEL or WINGZ! Last year, I had to ran some regressions for a class, and I tried to use the Amiga. Took me about two days to get it to work on MaxiPlan! The thing gets really slow when there are a lot of data, and it kept on crashing. I could have done the same thing on a Mac for about 5 hours. >Lotus is another one of those greedy companies trying to copyright >look-and-feel. I wouldn't want Commodore to pay millions just to port >a single piece of software., > Just one good program can sell many computers. I am sure many original IBM PC were sold because of LOTUS 123!!!
jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi (03/18/91)
In article <1991Mar17.215026.15598@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: > In article <1991Mar17.202827.5577@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes: >>In article <1991Mar17.031448.26855@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >>> In article <oo2Gzzh11@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >>> >>>>How's Commodore doing in getting software companies to take them >>>>seriously? >>> >>> It's not a matter of taking the Amiga seriously, it's a matter of >>> paying their development fees. Lotus would be glad to port their >>> products to the Amiga for about $15 mill. >>> >> >>(Note, I am reading between the lines...) >>Uhh?! Lotus _ported_ Improv to NeXT? From where? To my knowledge, Improv >>was _developed_ on NeXT platform. I have heard that they tried to >>program Improv before, for O/S 2 or something else. But only after they >>started to program on NeXT they could really make a working product out >>of that... >> >>Better check your points. >> Jouni Alkio, Helsinki, Finland > > You read too much in between the lines. I never said anything about > Improv. I've never used it, nor do I know anything about it. I was > talking about Lotus products in general. Software companies would be > glad to port software to the Amiga, at the right price. Hell, I bet > Apple would port Quickdraw to the Amiga if Commodore licensed it and paid > Apple a few hundred million. (yea, Apple is greedy.) > Well, wasn't your original point something like "of course it is easy for NeXT to get Lotus and other big companies to port software to their platform because NeXT pays much for doing that"? That's how I understood it, anyway. I just tried to show that this might not be the case... at least in the Lotus case. (And note that Improv is the only Lotus product available on NeXT - and it is only available on NeXT this far. BTW, Improv is a new generation spreadsheet - perhaps the best one.) Hmm. And what is wrong in NeXT making arrangements with software companies, after all? Users are happy to get new products. Jouni Alkio, Helsinki, Finland
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (03/20/91)
In article <1991Mar18.154007.5587@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes: > Hmm. And what is wrong in NeXT making arrangements with software > companies, after all? Users are happy to get new products. Nothing at all. You can always sell a $10 product for $5. Jobs can afford to do that, Commodore can't. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) (03/21/91)
In article <1991Mar17.031448.26855@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >In article <oo2Gzzh11@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >> >>In article <7724@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes: >> >> [ whole bunches of lines on the NeXT's availability deleted] >> >>A small price to pay for getting a chip (the 68040) fresh onto the >>market in a computer. Quite a few people ordered the new NeXT. Who >>can complain. However, I think Motorola is getting up to speed on on >>040 production. So, maybe the Amiga 4000 will be out in a year or >>two. For now, Amiga users can always pay for an Amiga 3000 then spend >>another $1500(or whatever it costs) to upgrade to the 040. > > It won't cost that much. In fact, it'll probably cost well under >$900 since I've seen 3 Amiga vendors quote $995 list for their 040 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Since the '040 is $600-$700 in quatity 1000 I seriously doubt that a '040 board will cost much less than $900 I bet when they are released prices will be higher since Motorola wants payment in advance. That means small manufacturers will pric accordingly. >boards when they ship. > >>-Mike >> >>BTW: It feels good knowing that Word Perfect 5.0 runs on the NeXT. >If I were a developer faced with a choice of porting to the Amiga or >porting to the NeXT, I'd port to the Amiga simply because the user base The wise thing to do is port to the platform that can give max return for development time invested. The NeXT is the best platform in that case since Iterface Builder makes development a lot faster. >is about 2 orders of magnitude bigger. Only one thing could change my >mind, and that would be if someone offered me a large sum of money I really don't think Jobs paid for the ports. I think they saw a new market anf jumped on it. Remember in the software game he who gets there first gets market share. Get an installed base early and make it difficult for you competitors to move in when the market starts to boom. >to port to the smaller market. Hell, if the sum was large enough, I'd >port it to the CBM Pet computer. Money talks, I just wish Commodore >would raise it's voice a little. -- /* -The opinions expressed are my own, not my employers. */ /* For I can only express my own opinions. */ /* */ /* Kent L. Shephard : email - kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com */
rivero@dev8.mdcbbs.com (03/21/91)
In article <1991Mar17.160633.9512@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: > In article <27E3053E.1145@orion.oac.uci.edu> nguyent@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Thien Nguyen) writes: >>In article <1991Mar17.031448.26855@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >> >>>It's not a matter of taking the Amiga seriously, it's a matter of >>>paying their development fees. Lotus would be glad to port their >>>products to the Amiga for about $15 mill. >>> >> >>Don't know about Word Perfect, but I think it might be worth it for Commodore >>to pay Lotus to port Improv from NEXT, or Microsoft to make Word instead of >>spending the money to advertise in magazines or newspapers. Just having >>these programs will sell the machines. >> >>Right now if I want to write proposals or research some papers, I am forced to >>use Amax on my 3000. There is no productivity software for the Amiga (period)! > > Oh bull. There are plenty of Word Processor and DTP programs for the Amiga. > They jusr aren't as easy to use (in Mac user's opinions) as MS Word, etc. > > You could still get work done you'd just have to read the manual and learn > how to use the program. > > Lotus is another one of those greedy companies trying to copyright > look-and-feel. I wouldn't want Commodore to pay millions just to port > a single piece of software., > > > -- > /~\_______________________________________________________________________/~\ > |n| rjc@albert.ai.mit.edu Amiga, the computer for the creative mind. |n| > |~| .-. .-. |~| > |_|________________________________| |_| |________________________________|_|
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (03/22/91)
In article <15L002.N06Qt01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L. Shephard) writes: >I really don't think Jobs paid for the ports. I think they saw a new >market anf jumped on it. Remember in the software game he who gets there >first gets market share. Get an installed base early and make it >difficult for you competitors to move in when the market starts to boom. That used to be the way the software market worked, but that's not the way the big guys play it anymore. They're used to a potential market of some 40-80 million systems. A good portion of them don't even jump into the nearly 4 million unit market of the Mac, or over 2 million market of the Amiga. When you're thinking of a system with well under 50,000 units, no matter how early that get in, they don't make enough profit to cover development cost, much less make a significant drop in the bucket compared to normal sales (keep in mind that a good part of the "sales" money for an established program is in upgrade fees, not new sales). The other thing is, the big software guys think about software differently. It used to be, you would write a program to get in on the bottom floor of a new hardware platform, so you could catch a big chunk of the money rolling in as people rushed over to this new platform. These days, the big guys know that in many cases, Joe Business User will buy whatever platform runs their application. Which leaves them little to no incentive to port to anything else, as long as the current platform is capable of doing everything they need it to be doing. The software, not the hardware, becomes the market, and the hardware is simply a way of supporting the software. Not everyone has this attitute so severly, though lots of people reading this very newsgroup believe it to a degree, or "Lotus" would not be the issue, we'd be talking about "a real good spreadsheet". Which is what I think we need; Lotus 1-2-3 stinks, IMHO (though the new one, "Improv" or whatever they call it, is moving toward a concept I call "Data Sheets", which is essentially my idealized spreadsheet replacement. Long ago, I wanted to do things that are still very clumsy to do on a modern spreadsheet, like computer timing models). Some companies want to be established horizontally, and so they port to practically everything, and become an industry standard, like WordPerfect. Others attack it the market vertically -- Lotus, for instance, will get lots more return on their investment writing something new for MS-DOS than they will porting something to a new platform with around 1/1000th the installed base. You can, of course, make it worth their while by paying for the port. That may even be good business sense, depending on your business, how much startup money you're still getting, etc. >/* Kent L. Shephard : email - kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com */ -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "What works for me might work for you" -Jimmy Buffett
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (03/22/91)
In article <1991Mar20.124422.3888@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: In article <1991Mar18.154007.5587@cc.helsinki.fi> jalkio@cc.helsinki.fi writes: > Hmm. And what is wrong in NeXT making arrangements with software > companies, after all? Users are happy to get new products. Nothing at all. You can always sell a $10 product for $5. Jobs can afford to do that, Commodore can't. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. What's amazing is that many people are still buying the $10 product. -Mike
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (03/23/91)
In article <ni2Gfcw51@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > What's amazing is that many people are still buying the $10 product. Wouldn't you, at $5? -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
bruce@zuhause.MN.ORG (Bruce Albrecht) (03/24/91)
In article <oo2Gzzh11@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >BTW: It feels good knowing that Word Perfect 5.0 runs on the NeXT. >How's Commodore doing in getting software companies to take them >seriously? When I ordered my upgrade to Word Perfect for AmigaDOS 2.0, I complained about the availability of 5.0 for the NeXT, when the market is so much smaller than the Amiga's, and they told me they weren't planning any additional development for the NeXT version. -- bruce@zuhause.mn.org
davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) (03/26/91)
In article <15L002.N06Qt01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L. Shephard) writes: >Since the '040 is $600-$700 in quatity 1000 I seriously doubt that a '040 >board will cost much less than $900 I bet when they are released prices >will be higher since Motorola wants payment in advance. That means small >manufacturers will pric accordingly. Have you seen how little is required to put an '040 in the CPU slot of the 3000? The board would be little more than a holder for the chip and a physical method for converting the PGA chip connectors to the CPU slot connectors. >The wise thing to do is port to the platform that can give max return for >development time invested. The NeXT is the best platform in that case >since Iterface Builder makes development a lot faster. 1) If you *KNOW* objective C. 2) If you *WANT* to work in Objective C. 3) If you can *STAND* objective C. I know NOBODY who fits all three of these, and very few who know 1 want to do 2 or 3. (Like working on Intel machines) >I really don't think Jobs paid for the ports. I think they saw a new >market anf jumped on it. Remember in the software game he who gets there >first gets market share. Get an installed base early and make it >difficult for you competitors to move in when the market starts to boom. Of course he did. For all of them in one way or another. If not in cash on some, then by simply having his name on the NeXT company letterhead. Dave
xgr39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU (Marc Barrett) (03/27/91)
In article <1991Mar26.043648.17656@NCoast.ORG>, davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes: >In article <15L002.N06Qt01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L. Shephard) writes: >>Since the '040 is $600-$700 in quatity 1000 I seriously doubt that a '040 >>board will cost much less than $900 I bet when they are released prices >>will be higher since Motorola wants payment in advance. That means small >>manufacturers will pric accordingly. > Have you seen how little is required to put an '040 in the CPU >slot of the 3000? The board would be little more than a holder for the chip >and a physical method for converting the PGA chip connectors to the CPU >slot connectors. In addition to the '040, Commodore's '040 board for the A3000 will very likely include a substantial amount of cache memory, and cache memory is still VERY expensive. This will, in turn, drive the cost of the board up. -MB- > > > Dave
jph@ais.org (Joseph Hillenburg) (03/27/91)
In article <1991Mar26.222344.16190@news.iastate.edu> xgr39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU (Mister Clueless) writes: >In article <1991Mar26.043648.17656@NCoast.ORG>, davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes: >> Have you seen how little is required to put an '040 in the CPU >>slot of the 3000? The board would be little more than a holder for the chip >>and a physical method for converting the PGA chip connectors to the CPU >>slot connectors. > > In addition to the '040, Commodore's '040 board for the A3000 will very >likely include a substantial amount of cache memory, and cache memory is >still VERY expensive. This will, in turn, drive the cost of the board up. > > Since when? I know Supra is giving the user a choice on the particular board. (I know they have 3 boards planned, all based on the same basic design) And ``very likely''. I think Dave (Haynie, not Wright) said an '040 board for the 3000 will be very basic. Marc, I'd watch what you say, since you *obviously* don't know what you're talking about. On the other hand, I'm more inclined to believe Dave Wright, since not only does he have a reputation for being right, but it's been stated by Haynie that it was Just That Simple. You, on the other hand, have a nasty reputation for being rude, obnovious, and above all, WRONG. > -MB- >> >> >> Dave -- // Joseph Hillenburg/Blackwinter, Secretary, Bloomington Amiga Users Group \X/ jph@valnet.UUCP jph@irie.ais.org jph@gnu.ai.mit.edu "Project: Desert Storm is also known as ``The Mother of All Ass-Kickings.''"
cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams) (03/27/91)
In article <1991Mar26.222344.16190@news.iastate.edu> xgr39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU writes: >In article <1991Mar26.043648.17656@NCoast.ORG>, davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes: >>In article <15L002.N06Qt01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L. Shephard) writes: >>>Since the '040 is $600-$700 in quatity 1000 I seriously doubt that a '040 >>>board will cost much less than $900 I bet when they are released prices >>>will be higher since Motorola wants payment in advance. That means small >>>manufacturers will pric accordingly. >> Have you seen how little is required to put an '040 in the CPU >>slot of the 3000? The board would be little more than a holder for the chip >>and a physical method for converting the PGA chip connectors to the CPU >>slot connectors. > > In addition to the '040, Commodore's '040 board for the A3000 will very >likely include a substantial amount of cache memory, and cache memory is >still VERY expensive. This will, in turn, drive the cost of the board up. > I predict that C= '040 board will not have any external cache memory. C= always like to keep prices down and will probably rely on the internal cache (as in the A3000). Though I could be totally wrong of course... > -MB- >> Dave -- Colin Adams Computer Science Department James Cook University Internet : cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au North Queensland 'And on the eight day, God created Manchester'
kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) (03/27/91)
In article <1991Mar26.043648.17656@NCoast.ORG> davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes: >In article <15L002.N06Qt01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L. Shephard) writes: >>Since the '040 is $600-$700 in quatity 1000 I seriously doubt that a '040 >>board will cost much less than $900 I bet when they are released prices >>will be higher since Motorola wants payment in advance. That means small >>manufacturers will pric accordingly. I was referencing price not ease of installation. But since you talk of installation ease. > Have you seen how little is required to put an '040 in the CPU >slot of the 3000? The board would be little more than a holder for the chip >and a physical method for converting the PGA chip connectors to the CPU >slot connectors. Not that easy. More pins on a '040 some of those pins are power pins. The '040 doesn't have the full 68882 built into it. This means that either you have to trap the instructions and provide emulation via the OS or you can recompile all your applications. The '040 is NOT just a drop in replacement for an '030. >>The wise thing to do is port to the platform that can give max return for >>development time invested. The NeXT is the best platform in that case >>since Iterface Builder makes development a lot faster. > 1) If you *KNOW* objective C. > 2) If you *WANT* to work in Objective C. > 3) If you can *STAND* objective C. You use interface builder. You don't write code for buttons, sliders,etc. You write your application in plain old C and your application talks to button and slider objects. >I know NOBODY who fits all three of these, and very few who know 1 want to >do 2 or 3. (Like working on Intel machines) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I happen to like Intel machines for some applications. Engineering software. It's cheaper than any other platform, more polished and more abundant. >>I really don't think Jobs paid for the ports. I think they saw a new >>market anf jumped on it. Remember in the software game he who gets there >>first gets market share. Get an installed base early and make it >>difficult for you competitors to move in when the market starts to boom. > Of course he did. For all of them in one way or another. If not ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Since yoou have no proof this is speculation. >in cash on some, then by simply having his name on the NeXT company letterhead. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This is called influence, NOT payment. > > Dave -- /* -The opinions expressed are my own, not my employers. */ /* For I can only express my own opinions. */ /* */ /* Kent L. Shephard : email - kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com */
ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) (03/28/91)
In article <4aQk02L406l501@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) writes: [stuff deleted] > Not that easy. More pins on a '040 some of those pins are power pins. > The '040 doesn't have the full 68882 built into it. This means that > either you have to trap the instructions and provide emulation via the OS > or you can recompile all your applications. The '040 is NOT just a drop > in replacement for an '030. How much (functionally) has been left out of the 68040 that the 68882 has? [more stuff deleted] > >I know NOBODY who fits all three of these, and very few who know 1 want to > >do 2 or 3. (Like working on Intel machines) > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > I happen to like Intel machines for some applications. Engineering > software. It's cheaper than any other platform, more polished and more > abundant. Only on MS-DOS you say, pity. [more stuff deleted] > > Dave > /* Kent L. Shephard : email - kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com */ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Andy Nagy (ptoper@gaul.csd.uwo.ca) The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada "Dee do do do, dee da da da, thats all I want to say to you" -- The Police
kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) (03/29/91)
In article <2577@ria.ccs.uwo.ca> ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) writes: >In article <4aQk02L406l501@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, >kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) writes: >[stuff deleted] >> Not that easy. More pins on a '040 some of those pins are power pins. >> The '040 doesn't have the full 68882 built into it. This means that >> either you have to trap the instructions and provide emulation via the OS >> or you can recompile all your applications. The '040 is NOT just a drop >> in replacement for an '030. > > How much (functionally) has been left out of the 68040 that the >68882 has? > The transcendental functions have been left out, ie tanh, sinh, cosh, etc. -- /* -The opinions expressed are my own, not my employers. */ /* For I can only express my own opinions. */ /* */ /* Kent L. Shephard : email - kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com */
ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) (03/29/91)
In article <52f1029o06cX01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) writes: > In article <2577@ria.ccs.uwo.ca> ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) writes: [stuff deleted] > > How much (functionally) has been left out of the 68040 that the > >68882 has? > > > > The transcendental functions have been left out, ie tanh, sinh, cosh, > etc. > -- Is it possible for the 68040 to use the 68882 the same way that the 68030 to do the transcendentals? If the answer to the first question is yes, then is it possible for a 68040 in the CPU slot (on an A3000) to use the 68882 on the motherboard? > /* Kent L. Shephard : email - kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com */ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Andy Nagy (ptoper@asterix.gaul.csd.uwo.ca) The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada "Dee do do do, dee da da da, thats all I want to say to you" -- The Police
Harvey_Taylor@mindlink.UUCP (Harvey Taylor) (03/29/91)
[Actually 040 - 882 relation] In <2577@ria.ccs.uwo.ca>, ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) writes: | [...] | How much (functionally) has been left out of the 68040 that the | 68882 has? | [more stuff deleted] | This came across comp.sys.next some time ago: |The 040 floating point hardware instructions are | FADD, FSUB, FMUL, FDIV, FSQRT, FMOVE (most addressing modes), | FABS, FNEG, FMOVEM, FCMP, FSAVE, FScc, FDBcc, FBcc, FRESTORE | |The 040 floating point software instructions are | FACOS, FASIN, FATAN, FATANH, FCOS, FCOSH, FETOX, FETOXL, FGETEXP, | FGETMAN, FINT, FINTRZ, FLOG10, FLOG2, FLOGN, FLOGNP1, FMOD, FMOVECR, | FREM, FSCALE, FSIN, FSINCOS, FSINH, FTAN, FTANH, FTENTOX, FTWOTOX | Check your 040 bible before using... -het "he looked so immaculately frightful as he bummed a cigarette and went off sniffing drainpipes & reciting the alphabet" -R Zimmerman Harvey Taylor Meta Media Productions uunet!van-bc!rsoft!mindlink!Harvey_Taylor a186@mindlink.UUCP
rivero@dev8.mdcbbs.com (03/29/91)
In article <2577@ria.ccs.uwo.ca>, ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) writes: > In article <4aQk02L406l501@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, > kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) writes: > [stuff deleted] >> Not that easy. More pins on a '040 some of those pins are power pins. >> The '040 doesn't have the full 68882 built into it. This means that >> either you have to trap the instructions and provide emulation via the OS >> or you can recompile all your applications. The '040 is NOT just a drop >> in replacement for an '030. > > How much (functionally) has been left out of the 68040 that the > 68882 has? > > [more stuff deleted] >> >I know NOBODY who fits all three of these, and very few who know 1 want to >> >do 2 or 3. (Like working on Intel machines) >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> I happen to like Intel machines for some applications. Engineering >> software. It's cheaper than any other platform, more polished and more >> abundant. > > Only on MS-DOS you say, pity. > Okay guys. I used to be an Amiga developer. I still own 3 systems at home. I am now a NeXT developer. Nobody paid me any money to do it, the NeXT is simply a more powerful, capable computer. I feel it is this decades Mac in terms of sales growth and market penetration, and so do my financial backers. I still love the Amiga, but it has its place and the NeXT occupies a different place. It's lie the car add where all the car salesman are saying "BMW has * just like it"," BMW would build it this way","This is just like the one ob the BMW", and the commercial tags with the line,"Why not OWN the BMW?" Point is, you can dress up an Amiga, and it will stil be an Amiga. If you, or your product, needs the power and capability of the NeXT, that's where you should be. 'nough said. Mike.
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (03/30/91)
In article <1991Mar26.222344.16190@news.iastate.edu> xgr39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU writes: > In addition to the '040, Commodore's '040 board for the A3000 will very >likely include a substantial amount of cache memory, and cache memory is >still VERY expensive. This will, in turn, drive the cost of the board up. Whether or not the C= board comes with lots of external cache, in general, you pay for performance. The NeXT machines don't provide external cache. It's certainly not required on a 68040 board for the A3000, and you could get pretty close to NeXT '040 system performance without it. Extra cache would be a good idea if you want to run faster than a NeXT '040 machine, but it certainly wouldn't be free. But since it's an A3000 add-in, I'm certain you'll be able to choose between several different '040 designs, so you can have your own price vs. performance tradeoff, not one dictated by C=. An '040 board for the A3000 doesn't have to have its own 32 bit Fast RAM. That makes the basic '040 board design relatively simple when compared to an A2000 Coprocessor board, which always needed 32-bit Fast RAM. I think to help differentiate their products, various '040 board Makers will add interesting additional features -- cache, very fast DRAM (also supported by the A3000 Coprocessor slot), or multiple CPUs come to mind. > -MB- -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M.
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (03/30/91)
In article <2577@ria.ccs.uwo.ca> ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) writes: >In article <4aQk02L406l501@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, >kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) writes: >[stuff deleted] >> Not that easy. More pins on a '040 some of those pins are power pins. "Easy" is a relative term. You don't simply plug a 68040 into the A3000. You must design some bus conversion logic to allow the 68040 to talk to the A3000 bus. You generally need to build a bus cycle converter and a bus sizing mechanism (though the bus sizing mechanism could in theory be a subset of the suggested bus conversion in the Motorola appnotes if you're clever about it). >> The '040 doesn't have the full 68882 built into it. This means that >> either you have to trap the instructions and provide emulation via the OS >> or you can recompile all your applications. The '040 is NOT just a drop >> in replacement for an '030. > How much (functionally) has been left out of the 68040 that the >68882 has? Motorola sez "The floating-point arithmetic instructions supported by the MC68040 are an enhanced subset of the MC68881/MC68882 floating-point coprocessor instructions". The 68040 adds instructions that include the data type they're working on (single/double). It also extends the FPU model with exception support, including the FPIAR (floating-point instruction address register), which points to any floating-point instruction prior to execution, allowing trap handlers to quickly find any unsupported FPU instruction. The missing '882 instructions are mainly the trancendental instructions: [H][A]SIN, [H][A]COS, [H][A]TAN. There are also a couple of manipulation functions, and the constant ROM, no longer built-in. This isn't really that strange, in fact, it's pretty common on RISC systems to emulate some or all of the floating point instructions via traps. SPARC is a good example; it left out the multiply and divide instructions in the first hardware implementations, yet still got good performance. >> I happen to like Intel machines for some applications. What the heck -- some people like Pabst Beer, or Madonna. Doesn't mean either is A Good Thing. >>Engineering software. It's cheaper than any other platform, more >>polished and more abundant. Engineering software is certainly cheaper for MS-DOS than for a typical Workstation. It's also, in many cases, barely functional. MS-DOS does not support enough memory to do much in the way of PCB CAD, for example. There are hacks around this, of course, but to really get that on a PC, you need a '386 and either UNIX or OS/2. And that OS requirement eliminates all three states advantages. Amiga CAD software in this area isn't as mature, but it's already getting as-capable. Pro-Net has its advantages and disadvantages over Schema or OrCAD, and it's only in its second generation. Pro-Board isn't quite as flexible as the OrCAD PCB program, but it's a zillion times faster and less buggy (both Pro-Board and OrCAD I've used are version 2.something). I have only recently acquired BoardMaster, but it seems to seriously kick the butt of the majority of low cost PC PCB applications, and it's dirt cheap. And I have yet to find a bug. On the other hand, there are some things which may never show up on any system other than MS-DOS. There's plenty of things that are so restricted in market, they can only survive on a lowest-common denominator type system, which like it or not is MS-DOS. >> /* Kent L. Shephard : email - kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com */ >Andy Nagy (ptoper@gaul.csd.uwo.ca) -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "That's me in the corner, that's me in the spotlight" -R.E.M.
tinyguy@cs.mcgill.ca (Yeo-Hoon BAE) (03/30/91)
Is it really worth having external cache with 040 chip? I read from somewhere which compared the performance of 486 with 128k cache and without one. In general, the presence of cache only makes 20% difference or so, according to them. I remember them stating that the internal 4 way assositive 8k cache is 'equivalent' to 32k external, assuming no clever cache contoller is used. Any comments ? -TG
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (03/30/91)
In article <1991Mar29.192948.1914@cs.mcgill.ca> tinyguy@cs.mcgill.ca (Yeo-Hoon BAE) writes:
Is it really worth having external cache with 040 chip?
I read from somewhere which compared the performance of
486 with 128k cache and without one. In general, the
presence of cache only makes 20% difference or so, according
to them. I remember them stating that the internal 4 way
assositive 8k cache is 'equivalent' to 32k external,
assuming no clever cache contoller is used.
Any comments ?
20% of 15 mips is 3 more mips. Anyone care for an extra 3 mips?
-Mikeschweige@aldebaran.cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) (03/31/91)
In article <1991Mar29.130758.1@dev8.mdcbbs.com> rivero@dev8.mdcbbs.com writes: >Okay guys. I used to be an Amiga developer. I still own 3 systems at home. >I am now a NeXT developer. Nobody paid me any money to do it, the NeXT >is simply a more powerful, capable computer. I feel it is this decades >Mac in terms of sales growth and market penetration, and so do my financial >backers. I still love the Amiga, but it has its place and the NeXT occupies a >different place. It's lie the car add where all the car salesman are saying >"BMW has * just like it"," BMW would build it this way","This is just like the >one ob the BMW", and the commercial tags with the line,"Why not OWN the BMW?" >Point is, you can dress up an Amiga, and it will stil be an Amiga. If you, or >your product, needs the power and capability of the NeXT, that's where you >should be. >'nough said. >Mike. I don't intend to knock the NeXT, I think that they have done some interesting things. I do wonder, though, whether or not they will really survive in the market place. Let's remember that they have apparently shipped less then 10% of the numbers of Amiga's that have shipped, and that from reports given here on the net are very backlogged in making deliveries (and are quite possibly losing sales because of it). The price-performance ratio for the NeXT is quite nice, nice enough so that I wonder if there is any real profit being made. Since NeXT is a privately held company, we don't get to find out how they are doing financially. On the other hand, we do know that Commodore is presently showing a profit, and that the Amiga, while certainly lacking the market penetration of MS-DOS machines, and Macs, does seem to be doing well in certain markets. As pointed out in the above post, though, it is useful to evaluate a machine for what it is, not for what it isn't. One should buy a machine that fits the users requirements. If the machine must have a 68040 _initially_, then the Amiga does not _yet_ fill the bill (although you may have to wait quite a while to get the NeXT that does come with the 68040). If you want an industry standard version of Unix, then the A3000UX with SVR4 may be much more appropriate then the Mac with A/UX or the NeXT. As far as my requirements went, I was quite happy with the Amiga (although I'd still like an Ada compiler, which I believe will come eventually. I note that the NeXT doesn't have an validated Ada compiler either). Jeff Schweiger -- ******************************************************************************* Jeff Schweiger Standard Disclaimer CompuServe: 74236,1645 Internet (Milnet): schweige@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil *******************************************************************************
davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) (04/01/91)
In article <1991Mar26.222344.16190@news.iastate.edu> xgr39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU writes: >In article <1991Mar26.043648.17656@NCoast.ORG>, davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes: >> Have you seen how little is required to put an '040 in the CPU >>slot of the 3000? The board would be little more than a holder for the chip >>and a physical method for converting the PGA chip connectors to the CPU >>slot connectors. > > In addition to the '040, Commodore's '040 board for the A3000 will very >likely include a substantial amount of cache memory, and cache memory is >still VERY expensive. This will, in turn, drive the cost of the board up. > > -MB- 1) How do you know what C='s board will have 2) How do you know that, if they DO provide FOR cache, that they will sell it with any chips installed? Why should they decide how much cache people want. A more realistic actions would be to provide ZIP/SIM sockets and let people add what they want. 3) Who say's it has to come from C=? There are 3rd part boards in the works right now, and there is no reason that some 3rd party mfgr won't sell a bare board (no '040 or chrystal), for a paltry amount, with no way to add a cache (such as the Midget Racer boards for the 500/2000 line). 4) If C= *DID* provide some cache, the price would still be the same as any other system with a '040 and cache, as again, the board itself (even with support for an on-board cache) would be basically very few parts (and certainly no expensive parts (other than the '040 and fast RAM, of course)). Dave
davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) (04/02/91)
In article <4aQk02L406l501@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L. Shephard) writes: > >Not that easy. More pins on a '040 some of those pins are power pins. I clearly said "in the CPU slot". The number of pins on the '040 is irrelevant. All signal lines are provided for on the CPU slot, and I would be VERY suprised if it needed any power lines with different levels than the '030 (or ANY modern CPU). >The '040 doesn't have the full 68882 built into it. This means that >either you have to trap the instructions and provide emulation via the OS >or you can recompile all your applications. The '040 is NOT just a drop >in replacement for an '030. Absolutely you would need some software support for the '040 to use the full functionality of the FP routines. This has zero to do with the physical aspects of designing an '040 board to fit the CPU slot of the 3000. This is strictly a software issue. And if I am not mistaken, the routines that are not included in the '040 are the less used functions, and again, if I am not mistaken, AmigaDOS 2.0 *DOES* provide for them in the standard math libraries (you know, the ones that will allow your program to run with no FPU, a '881, or a '882 with no coding changes). Personally, as I NEVER use FP, and I probobly own no program that does use FP and does make use of the seldom used missing functions, and I am pretty sure of #2 above, I consider this a moot point. And again, it's a software question, not a hardware one. >You use interface builder. You don't write code for buttons, sliders,etc. >You write your application in plain old C and your application talks to >button and slider objects. Gee, you mean just like in AmigaDOS 2.0? Boy, all this time I have been using PowerWindows and various other PD programs to create ready-to-compile modules that I just link in with "plain old C" modules I must have been doing some extra step somewhere. >>I know NOBODY who fits all three of these, and very few who know 1 want to >>do 2 or 3. (Like working on Intel machines) > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >I happen to like Intel machines for some applications. Engineering >software. It's cheaper than any other platform, more polished and more >abundant. The 80x86 is more polished than the 680x0? This is a first I have heard from someone who has used both. Most people who have worked with Intel chips have been able to notice that the '[234]86 is just a hacked up and souped up 808[0586], with the primitive early 70's segmentation archetecture. >> Of course he did. For all of them in one way or another. If not >Since yoou have no proof this is speculation. No, since I simply can't remember who wrote the article that appeared a while back stating openly how much NeXT, Inc. payed Lotus to write it on the NeXT, along with other "incentives" that would certainly sway any company (free machines to use to develop it, etc.) > >>in cash on some, then by simply having his name on the NeXT company letterhead. >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >This is called influence, NOT payment. Hmm, So if Bo Jackson puts his name on something it isn't going to increase the sales and/or prestige of the products that manufacturer makes, even if they are unrelated to the one he actually endorses? Take a marketing class. When a well-known person has something to do with a product, people remember the COMPANY who produces the product, NOT just the individual product they saw him/her hold in their hands. Dave
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (04/03/91)
In article <2602@ria.ccs.uwo.ca> ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) writes: > Is it possible for the 68040 to use the 68882 the same way that the >68030 to do the transcendentals? I'm a software guy, but wasn't the co-processor line taken out of the 68040? David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu 2.0 :: "You can't have your cake and eat it too." Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus