--- woodelf <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
> than those
needed to make a clock, thouygh. And
...I've not seen one
> book or magazine article on making a
processor
from scratch in the
> last 10 years.
This is because of the PC -- everybody wants clones
and anything
other than the 8088/8086 group of processers never
impacted
the market well. Other than the Mac that shot itself
in the foot
with only 128K memory total and a closed
architecture.
Everybody wants cars too! Few actually feel the
unction to build a car, but it does get done, albeit
rarely. I'm curious how a uP gets concocted, and read
with interest the last page of probably the 2nd issue
of Make, where a dude was doing just that (although in
the most rudimentary stages). My primary interest is
in 80x86 stuph, but I'm not altogether limited to it.
There's just more to keep ya busy. Just my personal
opinion.
The Mac was a trend starter, but it was too little
too late, aside from the price, small memory, and
closed architecture. Oi...here it goes. It was because
IBM built a micro-computer that it became so
successful. Ok, calm down y'all...substitute "IBM"
with "big established company". All the disparate (and
fun) platforms that lingered around in the 80s may
have managed to cling on longer (and perhaps rool) if
a "big established company" didn't get involved in the
micro-computer market.
I had met a guy at a job a long time ago who worked
for JPL. An older man who apparently was well
acquainted with the Victor line of calculators.
So...when he wanted a computer, what did he buy? A
Victor 9000 of course. A what? "THEY WERE A WELL
ESTABLISHED COMPANY!" went the retort. It seemed to
make more sense to buy something from them (to him).
And to the majority of people who did, "a big
established company" was a better choice.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com