I had a couple of 16 bit program I used a lot but they wont run now.
The reason Intel abandoned the i960 is relatively simple and summed up in the Wikipedia article.
It was tightly linked to them acquiring StrongARM, all a consequence of a lawsuit with DEC, etc, which basically replaced the i960.
The PXA (Xscale, ARMv5TE) used by Sharp for their PDA line? Intel ARM ... is only a part of the reason, and not reported in any Wikipedia article,
Intel's i960 (or 80960) was a RISC-based microprocessor design that became popular during the early 1990s as an embedded microcontroller. It became a best-selling CPU in that segment, along with the competing AMD 29000. In spite of its success, Intel stopped marketing the i960 in the late 1990s, as a result of a settlement with DEC whereby Intel received the rights to produce the StrongARM CPU. The processor continues to be used for a few military applications.
The intel core strength seems:
- focus on IA-32, rather than a "competing" architecture i960
- focus on IA-32, rather than a "competing" architecture ARM
So, it seems that the Intel leadership has repeated the same error of judgment first with i960 and then with Arm, plus a third error of judgment, even in the opposite direction (allocating money to a wrong solution), with Itanium.
There is still a thriving market for expandable x86 personal computers, workstations, and servers, but there is no such market even now for ARM.
the Apple equivalents of my x86 workstations with massive expandability going back three or four generations do not exist, and such an ARM alternative has never materialized.
Again, the same policy from the ruling class, and that's exactly the point: they didn't want to do anything except x86 because, according to them, x86 would bring in more money.
The funny thing is that they are so bad at evaluating things that they then invested in Itanium and today have to pay AMD a lot of money to be allowed to produce x86-64.
Which is LOL
My Boss's IBM-Tyran POWER9 workstation is superior by every means to every XEON-based workstation.
Consumes less electricity, it's more efficient and has the same expandability in terms of the number of PCIe slots, and it's even more reliable than XEON and its multi-core mechanisms are more robust.
sure, success ... worst intel cpus
not sure what drives DiTHBo's hatred
So, it seems that the Intel leadership has repeated the same error of judgment first with i960 and then with Arm, plus a third error of judgment, even in the opposite direction (allocating money to a wrong solution), with Itanium.
I'm not sure what drives DiTHBo's hatred of the X86 family. He is not wrong about some of the difficult issues, but those don't explain the level of antipathy.
I'm not sure what drives DiTHBo's hatred of the X86 family. He is not wrong about some of the difficult issues, but those don't explain the level of antipathy.
compatibility
You're assuming, even claiming, that this was an error. But Intel is still here, and financially well off. Is this an error?
Was MS-DOS an innovation?
retaining compatibility. Thus, the reason for the success and prevalence of x86 isn't so much because of technical reasons, but because of business choices
So, I can certainly understand the antipathy, even if I do not feel strongly about the issue myself.
retaining compatibility. Thus, the reason for the success and prevalence of x86 isn't so much because of technical reasons, but because of business choices
Yup, precisely.
Popular is popular
Was MS-DOS an innovation? Heck no, it was quite a step backwards compared to what the architecture ended up being capable of, but because of backwards compatibility and other business reasons, ended up being a construct of compromises than a clean design.
Was Windows an innovation? Heck no. You can look at Xerox Alto and then Apple Mac OS for innovations in that area.
I've been too scared to mention byte order.
You're assuming, even claiming, that this was an error. But Intel is still here, and financially well off. Is this an error?
I am assuming nothing, I am talking about facts!
From financial articles, Itanium and Atom were two big financial flops for intel itself.
I'm not sure what drives DiTHBo's hatred of the X86 family. He is not wrong about some of the difficult issues, but those don't explain the level of antipathy.
everyone repeats it, over and over - compatibility - and what do you want? Atom x86 even on smartphones? to be binary compatible with your PC? Would you like to run DOS on your smartphone?
LOL
no one sane would put an x86 on phones and tablets because it sucks about power consumption, when we talk about ARM and Intel's decision to decommission Xscale, we talk about this, and I don't understand why we need to bend reality to justify that it was objectively - by facts - a wrong choice by the leadership Intel, as all phones and tablets use ARM!
Mental illness I suspect,
Mental illness I suspect,
Aaaand any rational argument, any hope of convincing the other party of your position, is gone.
(Actually you probably did that with your earlier reply but you're really doubling down now.)
Tim
Mental illness I suspect,
Aaaand any rational argument, any hope of convincing the other party of your position, is gone.
(Actually you probably did that with your earlier reply but you're really doubling down now.)
Tim