On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 07:18:54 -0400, George Macdonald wrote:

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 10:00:41 GMT, Wes Newell
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 04:27:52 -0400, George Macdonald wrote:

Not sure of the importance of that... other than the fact that by that
time, the idea of building a useful business device around a microprocessor
had taken hold and had a future. By that time, Motorola and National Semi
were also making loud noises about their 68010 and 16032 32-bit
microprocessors - no point in putting the horrible truth up in bold
letters.:-)

Here we go agian. The 68010 was also defined as a 16bit CPU just like the
68000. The first defined as a 32bit by Motorola in the 68000 family was
the 68020.

Both are generallly recognized as 16/32-bit CPUs - both had 32-bit
registers and had some instructions which operated on the full width. The
point is, of course, that Intel was not going to peg its offering as 16-bit
only.

Yes, Intel had the 8086 (16bit) so wanted to sell its brother into the
lower-cost market. The fact is that they were both (8086 and 8088), by
any computer architect's definition. Marketing reality.

--
Keith