Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: rbowman Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: Remember "Bit-Slice" Chips ? Date: 13 Dec 2024 21:09:40 GMT Lines: 14 Message-ID: References: <947j2lx3qf.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <24ffec92-9486-251d-7a42-d376b88b2c9b@example.net> <20241209135847.00004fb7@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net Dmd/Q7NKuvkcDq6tV9JbVwWbhpyGjnCEdRAH8i9FS5wr6ZZqs2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:2/gPc4OkHYP8VKrgKtEUaGovbP8= sha256:ScOecQPNPCeQKm099YE2FaVuIljlOCqwKqSgHrI2TvE= User-Agent: Pan/0.149 (Bellevue; 4c157ba) Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:62340 On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:44:20 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2024-12-13, rbowman wrote: > >> The memory hole is deep and dark. I think I still have the preliminary >> datasheets for the iAPX 432 that was going to be Intel's real 32 bit >> processor. The iAPX 86 was a stop gap until they got the bugs worked >> out. > > "It's a good thing the iAPX432 failed. Otherwise a truly horrible Intel > architecture might have taken over the world." -- unknown It did seem to incorporate every fad of the day. When Intel goes off the rails they don't mess around. I hope they survive the foundry blues.