XPost: alt.folklore.computers, openwatcom.users.c_cpp   
   From: Peter@Iron-Spring.com   
      
   On 11/7/25 09:46, Dan Cross wrote:   
   > In article <10edcbg$lrh1$1@dont-email.me>,   
   > geodandw   wrote:   
   >> On 11/4/25 12:12, Richard Heathfield wrote:   
   >>> On 04/11/2025 15:20, Scott Lurndal wrote:   
   >>>> Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> writes:   
   >>>>> On 2025-11-03, Peter Flass  wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 11/3/25 13:24, Lynn McGuire wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> When I saw this subject line, I thought it was some necroposting to   
   >>>>> threads from 1990.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Someone still cared about segmented x86 shit in 2010 (even if 32 bit)?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> There are still people on the internet who swear that the 286 is   
   >>>> better than sliced bread and refuse to recognize that modern   
   >>>> architectures are superior.   
   >>>   
   >>> I can still hear them down the hall.   
   >>>   
   >>> ST!   
   >>> .......................................................Amiga!   
   >>> ST!   
   >>> .......................................................Amiga!   
   >>   
   >> The 68000 was a very nice processor for its time. It's too bad IBM   
   >> didn't use it in the PC.   
   >   
   > They wanted to.  IBM had a close relationship with Motorola, and   
   > they even had engineering samples in Westchester.  The problem   
   > was that 68k was a skunkworks project inside of Moto, which was   
   > pushing the 6809 as the Next Big Thing.  So when IBM was talking   
   > to Moto sales about using 68k for the PC, Moto was pushing them   
   > (not so gently) towards the 6809 and telling them 68k was just a   
   > research project with no future.   
   >   
   > IBM was smart enough to know that the 6809 was going to be a   
   > non-starter (a firmly 8-bit micro when 16-bit CPUs were becoming   
   > mainstream), and the 8088 met their specs for the 5150, so they   
   > went with Intel instead.  By the time it was clear that the 68k   
   > was going to be Moto's flagship CPU going forward, it was too   
   > late for inclusion in the PC.   
   >   
   > And here we are.   
   >   
   > 	- Dan C.   
   >   
      
   I think they used the 680x0 in one of their small computers. Maybe the   
   "Laboratory Computer"?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)