Is there no end

From: SUPRDAVE_at_aol.com <(SUPRDAVE_at_aol.com)>
Date: Sat Dec 15 19:17:54 2001

In a message dated 12/15/2001 7:18:46 PM Eastern Standard Time,
jhellige_at_earthlink.net writes:

<< >That is just right. Airc, IBM would'nt buy Intel's processor for the IBM
>PC unless Intel had multiple sources. This was to ensure supply to IBM if
>Intel's plants were overridden by bugs, damages by an infusion of dust (or
>aluminum powder.....;-)). AMD at least (and I think Seimens and NEC as
>well) was contracted to produce the 8088 cpu. AMD was given all info
>needed to clone the chips.
>
>This relationship continued through the 80286 and 80386 processors, but
>became very strained as AMD was making 386's cheaper and imho better than
>the intel products by modifying the Intel designs. Intel and AMD ended up
>in court over the 80486 chip ; intel claiming that the contract between it
>and AMD did not include information or production of this CPU. AMD was
>eventually forced to produce a 'clean room' 80486 design but because of
>the delays caused by the litigation they had plenty of time to do it.
 
    AMD's faster coprocessors also caused quite a problem if I
 remember correctly. Harris also pushed the 286 faster than any of
 the other sources. I remember PC Magazine running an article
 comparing various 286 machines with a headline that mimicked the
 Corvair's 'Unsafe at any speed' headline. >>


I've always liked AMD stuff. My first PC I got myself was an AMD 386 dx40. I
couldnt decide whether to get a 486-25 and didnt quite understand the sx/dx
issue. Ran OS/2 great on 8 meg. Later, I found that the AMD 486 dx2/80 was
cheaper than Intel's 66 so I got that and never any problems with it.

--

Kwanzaa is NOT a real holiday.
Received on Sat Dec 15 2001 - 19:17:54 GMT