22 Nov
2002
22 Nov
'02
2:37 p.m.
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 *