> Every time I hear about abandoned "improved" tech like this, I always wonder why the idea was shelved. The link kinda handwaves it away. Any good resources o

> Every time I hear about abandoned "improved" tech like this, I always wonder why the idea was shelved. The link kinda handwaves it away. Any good resources on why the idea didn't take off? My guess it is it was something like the "AI Winter:" a hyped idea fails in in a high-profile way, so it gets shunned for some period of time because people are afraid of failing again in a similar way. It seems like some of the features of that processor lead it to be a nonstarter for practical reasons: > According to the New York Times, "the i432 ran 5 to 10 times more slowly than its competitor, the Motorola 68000". Back then, personal computers didn't have much performance to spare. IIRC, Intel has had several high-profile failures when radically new non-x86 CPU architectures. Only backwards-compatible conservative evolutions of the x86 seem to get traction.