On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, ben franchuk wrote:
> In hindsight we now know that 16 bits is too small a
> addressing range for a general purpose byte/word cpu's
> and only expanding to split code/data and other memory
> management tricks could one have useful machine. Lets
> not forget video graphics too only took off with large
> addressing space too. Remember CGA !!! 16k of memory.
In hindsight behind your hindsight, it was very difficult to fit anything
more than 8 bits into a single-chip CPU in the early- to mid-70s when most
8-bit microprocessors were being designed. You have to remember there was
a progression of the state of the art to 16-bits, then to 32, etc.
;)
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
Received on Fri Nov 22 2002 - 14:37:00 GMT