Welcome Notice

Register Log in

Sad day for Intel and America...

W

Whoey Louie

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 7:43:13 PM UTC-4, Ricketty C wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 7:16:38 PM UTC-4, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
onsdag den 29. juli 2020 kl. 20.20.02 UTC+2 skrev Ricketty C:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 1:43:08 PM UTC-4, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:

Intel never succumbed to this featurism. They removed the
real drawback, and that was the small memory space and
concentrated on computation power.

Oh-so-wonderful-and-so-much-better Intel roadkills:
68K
Fairchild Clipper
MicroVAX
DEC Alpha
NS 16032 / 32032
Western 32k (?)
z8000/ z80000 (made AMD leave & then crawl back)
HP Snakes
sparc
MIPS ( I liked that one, maybe still Zombie state)
TI99K
Transputer (I had quite a T800 cluster then)
Intel 432 (wonderful machine, just too slow to implement
with the cache technology of the day)
Intel 860 (really HP\'s idea when the snakes ran out of steam)

It seems, Intel\'s X86 decisions were better than average.

I don\'t see ARM on that list... I\'m just sayin\'...


they were targeting a different market

https://youtu.be/_6sh097Dk5k?t=1500

watch the whole thing, it is a quite interesting insight into the whole ARM thing

You mean the market that is growing rather than shrinking and that Intel isn\'t doing so well competing in? It\'s not that Intel isn\'t in the same market, it\'s that they still have not yet found their footing in it.
Intel isn\'t going to find their footing when they long ago gave up on
those ARM markets and stopped trying.
 
W

Whoey Louie

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 1:28:31 PM UTC-4, edward...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 10:07:20 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 8:04:09 PM UTC-4, Anthony Stewart wrote:
On Tue. 28 Jul.-20 7:40 p.m., Whoey Louie wrote:

https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corp’s plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the company’s factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies..
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.




I can imagine the technical challenges with this takes so much
experience with high E-field ionization prevention with unavoidable
invisible contamination to get high yields. I can\'t imagine anyone else
competing with TMSC.

So what makes TSMC so special? It\'s not like Intel is some small company
without access to the same process eqpt, without funds to pay for whatever
it takes, without access to whatever it takes. They were ahead for decades,
so why is only TSMC capable now? I\'m sure books will be written about this
in the years to come. My best guess is that it\'s the result of bad management,
choosing accountants to run a leading edge, high tech company.

It\'s the need for custom clean room.
Again, so what? TSMC knows how to make a clean room and Intel doesn\'t?
TSMC can afford the latest tech, but Intel can;t? Makes no sense.




Both Samsung and Intel are under-estimating the yield issues. TSMC spend lots of time and effort in cleaning, and taking Samsung and Intel to the cleaner. I heard that TSMC is 100x cleaner than the competitors.

It\'s not rocket science that as process tech advanced, it required continually
more advanced clean rooms. Intel suddenly forgot that? Makes no sense. Nor
have I seen anyone in the industry give that as the reason.
 
J

Jan Panteltje

Guest
On a sunny day (Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:27:36 -0700) it happened
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
<ap83ifho07dhtee9am0jc3pdpf4kiqaok3@4ax.com>:

>Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.

Not really,
I remember boss called me into his office and showed me the first 386
we were working close with IBM.
What a speed!
At that time there was nothing better.

What\'s a PC? We controlled factories with it, PCs controlling Siemens PLCs.
A whole department using PCs to program those.

I designed cards for it, even designed a vector computing ISA card.
I/O cards..
It was all about compatibility, 286 -> 386 software had to run on it.
And there was, at that moment, nothing to match it.
Things really started moving when the clones came and everybody bought a PC.
 
J

Jan Panteltje

Guest
On a sunny day (Wed, 29 Jul 2020 22:35:23 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Ricketty C
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
<3734fe3a-d18c-4b1a-a260-5fe2da3b6cf2o@googlegroups.com>:

It\'s funny that you think Hogan\'s Heros and Stalag 13 is anything like rewriting history. That\'s a real laugh. You do know
it\'s a comedy based on truly absurd characters, right?
It is what the UK citizens are fed over and over again and they believe it.


< bunch of ranting drivel snipped >

For lack of arguments you refer to insults.
Better fix your opensource thingy!
 
J

John Doe

Guest
Do what?

Because Intel did not early on give up its fabrication plants to
foreigners, now Intel is suffering and \"It\'s a sad day for the
future of high tech in America.\" ???

But seriously...

--
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

X-Received: by 2002:a37:a104:: with SMTP id k4mr29731328qke.384.1595979609373; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a7cc:: with SMTP id q195mr31144610qke.110.1595979609101; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:09 -0700 (PDT)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!fdn.fr!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=172.58.187.182; posting-account=C1SVQAkAAACfJY63oQnKBve0H-yhg4CH
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.58.187.182
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <dc4a803b-e1d8-46a7-a453-02b5d3aee005o@googlegroups.com
Subject: Sad day for Intel and America
From: Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net
Injection-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 23:40:09 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"UTF-8\"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:603141


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corpƒ Ts plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the companyƒ Ts factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.
 
J

John Doe

Guest
Jan Panteltje <pNaOnStPeAlMtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

snipped a bunch of nonsense> A bunch of religious fanatic dummies
that do everything to prevent colonizing planets as finding alien
life there would violate their idea of Adam end Eve.. and
creation.
I meet atheists who know NOTHING about science, all the time. Like
those who promote climate change legislation while advocating for
the elimination of nuclear power plants.

Atheist morons.

If you think religious belief means anti-science, you are CLUELESS.

The silly show of a few aircraft carriers in the Chinese Sea that
can be sunk in a few minutes either by some missile or just drop a
nuke next to that fleet
A disadvantage to having many nuclear power plants like communist
China is the fact their energy grid is easy to destroy. America is
in a great position at this point, being the world\'s largest oil
exporter. Communist China is obviously militarily inferior to us. We
will slap them down just like we did the last time.

Taking out all 45+ of China\'s nuclear reactors is easy and
devastating.

Maybe not so hard, an other reason we should, as species, colonize
the universe.
Agreed. The difference between you and I is that I\'m not blind to
the fact solar power won\'t get us from here to there.
 
J

Jan Panteltje

Guest
On a sunny day (Thu, 30 Jul 2020 07:21:06 -0000 (UTC)) it happened John Doe
<always.look@message.header> wrote in <rftsd2$ss0$5@dont-email.me>:

Jan Panteltje <pNaOnStPeAlMtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

snipped a bunch of nonsense> A bunch of religious fanatic dummies
that do everything to prevent colonizing planets as finding alien
life there would violate their idea of Adam end Eve.. and
creation.

I meet atheists who know NOTHING about science, all the time. Like
those who promote climate change legislation while advocating for
the elimination of nuclear power plants.

Atheist morons.
Greens are a problem, they will not rest until everybody lives in grass huts.


If you think religious belief means anti-science, you are CLUELESS.

The silly show of a few aircraft carriers in the Chinese Sea that
can be sunk in a few minutes either by some missile or just drop a
nuke next to that fleet

A disadvantage to having many nuclear power plants like communist
China is the fact their energy grid is easy to destroy. America is
in a great position at this point, being the world\'s largest oil
exporter. Communist China is obviously militarily inferior to us. We
will slap them down just like we did the last time.
The last time was Vietnam and you left like a dog with its tail between its legs,


Taking out all 45+ of China\'s nuclear reactors is easy and
devastating.
China has coal mines too.
How many nuculear plants does the unditedstates have left after the greens had a go?


Maybe not so hard, an other reason we should, as species, colonize
the universe.

Agreed. The difference between you and I is that I\'m not blind to
the fact solar power won\'t get us from here to there.
Solar power won\'t get us from here to there.
Only nuculear power will.
 
B

Bill Sloman

Guest
On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 4:53:57 PM UTC+10, John Doe wrote:
Whoey Louie <tra...@optonline.net> wrote:

X-Received: by 2002:a37:a104:: with SMTP id k4mr29731328qke.384.1595979609373; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a7cc:: with SMTP id q195mr31144610qke.110.1595979609101; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:09 -0700 (PDT)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!fdn.fr!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=172.58.187.182; posting-account=C1SVQAkAAACfJY63oQnKBve0H-yhg4CH
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.58.187.182
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <dc4a803b-e1d8-46a7...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Sad day for Intel and America
From: Whoey Louie <tra...@optonline.net
Injection-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 23:40:09 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"UTF-8\"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:603141


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel CorpÉ Ts plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the companyÉ Ts factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.

Do what?

Because Intel did not early on give up its fabrication plants to
foreigners, now Intel is suffering and \"It\'s a sad day for the
future of high tech in America.\" ???

But seriously...
As if John Doe - the top-posting troll - knows what \"serious\" might mean.

The problem with Intel is that they couldn\'t do their own fabrication well enough to be competitive with the fpreign countries that could.

The problem is with Intel, rather than America per se, but - granting that Intel had pots of money and should have been able to access the best of US technology, it does raise questions about the effectiveness of the US way of doing business.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
J

John Doe

Guest
This Australian troll just loves to bash America...

--
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

X-Received: by 2002:a37:5bc3:: with SMTP id p186mr38682560qkb.401.1596107659084; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 04:14:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a37:4907:: with SMTP id w7mr37260110qka.492.1596107658778; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 04:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.uzoreto.com!tr1.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 04:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <rftqq1$ss0$2@dont-email.me
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=110.174.91.153; posting-account=SJ46pgoAAABuUDuHc5uDiXN30ATE-zi-
NNTP-Posting-Host: 110.174.91.153
References: <dc4a803b-e1d8-46a7-a453-02b5d3aee005o@googlegroups.com> <rftqq1$ss0$2@dont-email.me
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <ec41ba82-3aac-4a40-be34-033e7feebf13n@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Sad day for Intel and America
From: Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org
Injection-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 11:14:19 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"UTF-8\"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 89
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:603346

On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 4:53:57 PM UTC+10, John Doe wrote:
Whoey Louie <tra...@optonline.net> wrote:

X-Received: by 2002:a37:a104:: with SMTP id k4mr29731328qke.384.1595979
609373; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a7cc:: with SMTP id q195mr31144610qke.110.15959
79609101; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:09 -0700 (PDT)
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.etern
al-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!fdn.fr!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=172.58.1
87.182; posting-account=C1SVQAkAAACfJY63oQnKBve0H-yhg4CH
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.58.187.182
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <dc4a803b-e1d8-46a7...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Sad day for Intel and America
From: Whoey Louie <tra...@optonline.net
Injection-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 23:40:09 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=\"UTF-8\"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:603141


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-i
s-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel CorpÇ% Ts plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an e
ra in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ag
o, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the companyÇ% Ts factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnin
gs
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first scre
wed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile

Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has

slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel

won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.

In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production

to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this i
s
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s jus
t
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would

up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely

Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Inte
l.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.

Do what?

Because Intel did not early on give up its fabrication plants to
foreigners, now Intel is suffering and \"It\'s a sad day for the
future of high tech in America.\" ???

But seriously...

As if John Doe - the top-posting troll - knows what \"serious\" might mean.

The problem with Intel is that they couldn\'t do their own fabrication well enough to be competitive with the fpreign countries that could.

The problem is with Intel, rather than America per se, but - granting that Intel had pots of money and should have been able to access the best of US technology, it does raise questions about the effectiveness of the US way of doing business.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
P

Phil Hobbs

Guest
On 2020-07-30 01:53, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:27:36 -0700) it happened
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
ap83ifho07dhtee9am0jc3pdpf4kiqaok3@4ax.com>:

Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.

Not really,
I remember boss called me into his office and showed me the first 386
we were working close with IBM.
What a speed!
At that time there was nothing better.
The 68020 came out a year or so earlier than the \'386.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
 
W

Whoey Louie

Guest
On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 1:53:38 AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:27:36 -0700) it happened
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
ap83ifho07dhtee9am0jc3pdpf4kiqaok3@4ax.com>:

Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.

Not really,
I remember boss called me into his office and showed me the first 386
we were working close with IBM.
What a speed!
At that time there was nothing better.

What\'s a PC? We controlled factories with it, PCs controlling Siemens PLCs.
A whole department using PCs to program those.

I designed cards for it, even designed a vector computing ISA card.
I/O cards..
It was all about compatibility, 286 -> 386 software had to run on it.
And there was, at that moment, nothing to match it.
Things really started moving when the clones came and everybody bought a PC.
Exactly. It\'s hard to argue with success.
 
W

Whoey Louie

Guest
On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 7:37:31 AM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 2020-07-30 01:53, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:27:36 -0700) it happened
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
ap83ifho07dhtee9am0jc3pdpf4kiqaok3@4ax.com>:

Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.

Not really,
I remember boss called me into his office and showed me the first 386
we were working close with IBM.
What a speed!
At that time there was nothing better.

The 68020 came out a year or so earlier than the \'386.
Yes, but that was year later, the first IBM PC used the 8088, the AT used
the 286 and there was already an existing OS and user software on X86
that was not going to run on a 68X anything.
 
P

Pimpom

Guest
On 7/30/2020 5:07 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 2020-07-30 01:53, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:27:36 -0700) it happened
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
ap83ifho07dhtee9am0jc3pdpf4kiqaok3@4ax.com>:

Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.

Not really,
I remember boss called me into his office and showed me the first 386
we were working close with IBM.
What a speed!
At that time there was nothing better.

The 68020 came out a year or so earlier than the \'386.
My 68020 Amiga A1200 could run rings around a 386 Win95 machine.
Amiga OS 3.0 took up all of 4MB HDD space fully installed and
could be run from a single 880KB floppy if needed. Win95 took up
what - 40MB?
 
S

server

Guest
Yes, but that was year later, the first IBM PC used the 8088, the AT used
the 286 and there was already an existing OS and user software on X86
that was not going to run on a 68X anything.
I\'m from then, I remember. But that\'s a far cry from the Flying Dutchman\'s claim that there was nothing better at the time.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs
 
S

server

Guest
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 06:14:25 -0700 (PDT), pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:

Yes, but that was year later, the first IBM PC used the 8088, the AT used
the 286 and there was already an existing OS and user software on X86
that was not going to run on a 68X anything.

I\'m from then, I remember. But that\'s a far cry from the Flying Dutchman\'s claim that there was nothing better at the time.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs
I had an LSI-11 based timeshare system, well into the PC-XT era. It
would timeshare eight users, ran multiple languages including
assembly, actually ran multiple OSs, had absolute memory management
and protection, had a bulletproof file system, and ran solid for
months between ac power failures.

We used the Macro-11 assembler as the assembler for other micros, just
with defining macros. The guy who wrote Macro-11 said \"it\'s not an
assembler, it\'s a language processor.\"

There was nothing a user could do to crash it.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
 
W

whit3rd

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 8:58:31 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 4:01:48 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.

It did leave a lot of competing architectures in the dust
performance-wise but it\'s not inherently elegant ...

So it left a lot of competing architectures in the dust performance wise,
it maintained code compatibility with the huge X86 base, it was enormously
successful, but it was a \"kludgy dog\" because it was not inherently elegant. Wow. And IDK how you make something inherently elegant, whatever that even
means, when you have to maintain the existing X86 architecture.
But, you DON\'T have to maintain the architecture. Apple had overall compatibility
with MC68000 through 68040, and swapped in PowerPC in the nineties, and
a decade later Intel (Core generation), while maintaining overall code compatibility.
They\'re about to move to ARM, because the low-power devices on that base
have become ubiquitous.

Heck, the NeXT group had a single codebase that could build to several architectures,
and SPARC kept going largely because of Java (and its cross-platform compatibility model).

For user experience, the game consoles haven\'t suffered from the variety of
non-Intel architectures they employ.

What seems to matter for marketability, is to have a vertical corporate entity that
handles hardware/firmware/OS/software all in one place. Intel (they build boards)
and Apple are thus dominant, with Broadcom in the background.
 
B

bitrex

Guest
On 7/30/2020 9:14 AM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, but that was year later, the first IBM PC used the 8088, the AT used
the 286 and there was already an existing OS and user software on X86
that was not going to run on a 68X anything.

I\'m from then, I remember. But that\'s a far cry from the Flying Dutchman\'s claim that there was nothing better at the time.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs
My buddy had a 286-class desktop around 1990. 1 meg of ram at 12 MHz
clock if I recall. I think it cost him about 500 bucks, used, for the
whole system - a fortune for a teenager.

It was a real slug even by 1990 standards
 
L

Lasse Langwadt Christensen

Guest
torsdag den 30. juli 2020 kl. 21.30.38 UTC+2 skrev bitrex:
On 7/30/2020 9:14 AM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, but that was year later, the first IBM PC used the 8088, the AT used
the 286 and there was already an existing OS and user software on X86
that was not going to run on a 68X anything.

I\'m from then, I remember. But that\'s a far cry from the Flying Dutchman\'s claim that there was nothing better at the time.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs


My buddy had a 286-class desktop around 1990. 1 meg of ram at 12 MHz
clock if I recall. I think it cost him about 500 bucks, used, for the
whole system - a fortune for a teenager.

It was a real slug even by 1990 standards
and by the end of the 90\'s everyone at uni was using their own PC because
that were much faster than sharing an expensive Sun UltraSparc servers
 
B

bitrex

Guest
On 7/30/2020 4:02 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
torsdag den 30. juli 2020 kl. 21.30.38 UTC+2 skrev bitrex:
On 7/30/2020 9:14 AM, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, but that was year later, the first IBM PC used the 8088, the AT used
the 286 and there was already an existing OS and user software on X86
that was not going to run on a 68X anything.

I\'m from then, I remember. But that\'s a far cry from the Flying Dutchman\'s claim that there was nothing better at the time.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs


My buddy had a 286-class desktop around 1990. 1 meg of ram at 12 MHz
clock if I recall. I think it cost him about 500 bucks, used, for the
whole system - a fortune for a teenager.

It was a real slug even by 1990 standards

and by the end of the 90\'s everyone at uni was using their own PC because
that were much faster than sharing an expensive Sun UltraSparc servers
Probably 70% of the students at the college I went to had their own PC
in their dorm room in \'96 or \'97. It was a liberal arts school all
people do is write papers at all hours of the day and night.

I worked in the IT department such as it was my first couple years, what
kind of personal compute hardware people brought though was all over the
map there at that time, though. You\'d go to set up someone\'s dorm
computer to the in-room Ethernet port for the newfangled Internet and
never quite know what to expect. Anything from the latest Pentium PCs
and high-end Macs to a Mac II from 1987, 286es, laptops, desktops, those
pizza-box Macs from the early 90s, Amiga, even saw a Commodore 64 one time.

Most of them you could at least get to run an email client with a bit of
work.
 
D

david eather

Guest
On 30/07/2020 2:04 am, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 10:11:59 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 04:01:42 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corp’s plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the company’s factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.



Intel screwed up the transition to EUV somehow. I think the problem
was mostly technical.

That said, Intel\'s management seems to be very rigid.

Intel\'s other problem is that x86 is ancient and buggy, and biggies
like Apple and Google can roll their own Arm-based chips and come out
ahead on price and performance.

I think Samsung is going to drop $1e10 or something amazing on a new
EUV-based fab too.


They tried making an x86 low-power derivative to compete with the ARM
market segment at one point, it was called Atom and it kinda sucked

Intel\'s value has always been superb lithography cranking out bad
architectures, and now they don\'t have the lithography.




I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.

It\'s always been a klugey dog. It evolved directly from 4004, 8008,
and 8080. When x86 was evolved (not invented) there were much better
architures around, like PDP-11 and 68K and others.

x86 has always been weak on hardware protections, and the ones that it
has are rarely used. So we get buffer overflow exploits, cache
exploits, all those crashes and viruses and trojans and ransomware and
patch-fests.

IF true, then it\'s odd that so much of the internet and modern computing
runs so successfully on it.
JL is speaking the truth. x86 is crappy and always has been. You don\'t
see the monthly bug updates? It was so successful because it closely
partnered with Microsoft, who also , managed to screw up their own core
business with the equivalent application of their approach to
competitors (embrace, extend, extinguish). Anyone remember windows 2000,
XP, Vista, 7 and 8? A lot of people got sick of replacing working
hardware because Microsoft said so. Many people switched to tablets and
smart phones because that did everything they wanted. Now of course
their is the race to get the latest phone for fashion, but the old ones
still work.
c plus x86 is a mess. x86 means \"execute anything.\"


It did leave a lot of competing architectures in the dust
performance-wise but it\'s not inherently elegant like the Shinkansen
bullet-train or anything, it\'s like that Budd RDC they mounted jet
engines to, as an engineering analogy.

The performance came from lithography and insanely complex - and
power-hungry - work-arounds to the ghastly architecture and
instruction set.

I won\'t miss x86 when it\'s gone.

Intel has made many attempts to sell something else, ranging from
super-cisc to super-risc. I suspect internal politics killed them off.


Not internal politics, lack of customer acceptance. None of those were very
good. The Titanium was pretty much targeted at one customer, HP, it was
way late. The 960 had stiff competition and didn\'t gain enough design
wins to establish it as an architecture and it was targeted at markets
where the X86 could not compete. It\'s not like the X86 team had to come
with axes to kill it, they didn\'t even pay any attention to it.
probably a bit of both plus no patience to grow a market.

Also, I know a lot of the maker movement was unwilling to use intel as
their chips were difficult to use, there was little support, and a
general lack of trust that intel would stay around if it managed to kill
off the opposition.
 
Toggle Sidebar

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Top