Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > openwatcom.users.c_cpp > #3674
| From | cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.folklore.computers, openwatcom.users.c_cpp, comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ |
| Date | 2025-11-07 16:46 +0000 |
| Organization | PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC |
| Message-ID | <10el7q0$hqi$1@reader2.panix.com> (permalink) |
| References | <hhq63802k7f@news7.newsguy.com> <dRoOQ.1421028$xYr1.1123604@fx14.iad> <10edc6e$3q1si$1@dont-email.me> <10edcbg$lrh1$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
In article <10edcbg$lrh1$1@dont-email.me>, geodandw <geodandw@gmail.com> wrote: >On 11/4/25 12:12, Richard Heathfield wrote: >> On 04/11/2025 15:20, Scott Lurndal wrote: >>> Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> writes: >>>> On 2025-11-03, Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> wrote: >>>>> On 11/3/25 13:24, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>> >>>> When I saw this subject line, I thought it was some necroposting to >>>> threads from 1990. >>>> >>>> Someone still cared about segmented x86 shit in 2010 (even if 32 bit)? >>> >>> There are still people on the internet who swear that the 286 is >>> better than sliced bread and refuse to recognize that modern >>> architectures are superior. >> >> I can still hear them down the hall. >> >> ST! >> .......................................................Amiga! >> ST! >> .......................................................Amiga! > >The 68000 was a very nice processor for its time. It's too bad IBM >didn't use it in the PC. They wanted to. IBM had a close relationship with Motorola, and they even had engineering samples in Westchester. The problem was that 68k was a skunkworks project inside of Moto, which was pushing the 6809 as the Next Big Thing. So when IBM was talking to Moto sales about using 68k for the PC, Moto was pushing them (not so gently) towards the 6809 and telling them 68k was just a research project with no future. IBM was smart enough to know that the 6809 was going to be a non-starter (a firmly 8-bit micro when 16-bit CPUs were becoming mainstream), and the 8088 met their specs for the 5150, so they went with Intel instead. By the time it was clear that the 68k was going to be Moto's flagship CPU going forward, it was too late for inclusion in the PC. And here we are. - Dan C.
Back to openwatcom.users.c_cpp | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2025-11-02 13:20 -0700
OT: 2010 posts (was: Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-03 14:58 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-03 14:24 -0600
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2025-11-03 16:25 -0700
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-04 00:26 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-11-04 15:20 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2025-11-04 09:39 -0700
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-11-04 17:14 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-11-04 17:32 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-04 17:38 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-11-04 21:23 +0100
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-11-04 22:04 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-11-05 08:50 +0100
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-11-05 15:15 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-11-06 08:51 +0100
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-04 22:17 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-11-07 15:50 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-11-07 16:08 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-11-07 16:54 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> - 2025-11-07 08:22 -0800
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-11-07 17:22 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-11-09 11:15 +0200
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-11-10 09:08 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-11-07 17:43 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-07 19:40 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2025-11-08 08:45 -0700
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-11-04 17:12 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ geodandw <geodandw@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 12:15 -0500
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-04 17:21 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-04 22:19 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-05 00:13 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-11-07 16:46 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2025-11-08 08:47 -0700
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2025-11-08 21:17 +0000
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> - 2025-11-04 08:29 -0800
Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++ Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> - 2025-11-04 08:32 -0800
csiph-web