From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) Subject: Re: 486SXs as Unix Iron? Date: 16 Nov 1992 22:32:45 GMT
In <id.SGYU.X4L@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.204936.9751@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>> >The 486SX is a different die, cheaper process, cheaper packaging, and so
>> >on. It's a cheaper chip all around.
>> Is now; wasn't when they initially released it.
>And you really think it's a good idea to set up a new fab line for a product
>before you know if it'll be successful, when you have the ability to test
>market it for a relatively low cost using untested or partially failed parts?
>Apparently you do.
I always love it when people tell me what I 'apparently' think; mostly
because they're invariably so laughably wrong. What I think is that
the whole thing was a marketing scam and they shouldn't have built the
silly things in the first place. Or if what they wanted was an outlet
for 'failed' DX parts, why the rearrangement of pinout and why the
silly games with the 487 parts? And, if they wanted an outlet for
failed DX parts so badly, WHAT DO THEY DO WITH THEM NOW?
If they hadn't started out this stupid little game of trying to kill
competitors in the first place, they wouldn't have needed to set up a
FAB line, PERIOD.
-- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ============================================================================== Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.