Corrections to trivia

From: Eric Smith <eric_at_brouhaha.com>
Date: Mon Oct 5 18:20:10 1998

> Dec sold the LSI-11 and later chip based systems as microcomputers.

They sold the *systems* as "microcomputers". That has little bearing on
whether the LSI-11 MOS VLSI chip set can be considered to be a
microprocessor.

> Source for this is the bindings of not less than 7 databooks and
> technical descriptions.

Yes, I've got the whole set as well.

> Also the T-11 member of the family is a single
> 40pin dip with one die inside.

Still not relevant. The T-11 was definitely a microprocessor, but it came
much later than the LSI-11. AFAIK noone ran Unix on a T-11, but even
if they did, it certainly didn't predate running Unix on an LSI-11.

> If that werent' the case the fairchild F8 would not qualify as a single
> chip CPU due to the need for multiple chips and the same would apply to
> the predecessor to the RCA CDP1802.

Certainly the F8 qualifies as a single chip CPU. So did the 8080, 6800,
6502, Z-80, etc. Just because it took some additional chips to make a
system doesn't mean that it didn't have a single-chip CPU.

We haven't established a precise definition for microprocessor, but what
you seem to be talking about is a microcontroller, which is a complete
system on a chip (i.e., CPU, memory, and I/O).

You'll get very few people to agree that the memory and I/O must be present
for a chip to qualify as a microprocessor. This is evident from the word
itself: 'micro', meaning small, and 'processor', meaning something that
processes information. Nothing in either the 'micro' or 'processor' portion
of the word seems to imply that any memory or I/O are included.

AFAIK, the first true microcontroller (CPU, memory, and I/O on one monolithic
IC) was the Intel 8048.

Eric
Received on Mon Oct 05 1998 - 18:20:10 BST