Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 08 Jul 1999 07:24:52 -0600
From:      Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
To:        Nadav Eiron <nadav@cs.Technion.AC.IL>
Cc:        David Scheidt <dscheidt@enteract.com>, Yann Ramin <atrus@matadore.montereyhigh.com>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: IA64
Message-ID:  <4.2.0.56.19990708071909.03f9cda0@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95-heb-2.07.990708101118.19553A-100000@csd>
References:  <4.2.0.56.19990708010511.04150de0@localhost>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 10:15 AM 7/8/99 +0300, Nadav Eiron wrote:

 >The fact the only remaining relative of the i860 is the i960 (and they are
>not close relatives, BTW) is exactly why I say it wasn't successful. The
>i860 was _not_ an embedded design. 

Not so. Intel sold it as an embedded design, and *actually refused* to sell
it to any manufacturer who wished to use it as a general purpose CPU on
any significant scale. Intel allowed MicroWay to build boards which used
one or more i860s in combination with an x86 in the same machine, but they 
actively discouraged the development of any i860 products that would 
cannibalize their precious x86 monopoly. The parts just wouldn't be available.

I attended an Intel presentation at the time when the i860 was released
which emphasized this.

--Brett



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.2.0.56.19990708071909.03f9cda0>