3 ms·

> Later 68000 NuBUS TI-UNIX systems were developed when MIPS and ARM were both visible. What were they thinking? Inexpensive unix workstations for running esta

> Later 68000 NuBUS TI-UNIX systems were developed when MIPS and ARM were both visible. What were they thinking? Inexpensive unix workstations for running established and embedded applications. Also, they developed a lot of chips and designs for certain other large 68k+nubus players, so it certainly wasn't just throwing money into a one-and-done pit. BTW, whatever they were thinking was correct, because afaik those TI1500 machines were profitable for them.

chasil 4y ago
They were also producing SPARC chips for Sun by this point. Why on earth choose 68k when the entire market saw SPARC wiping the floor with CISC? EDIT: If Wikipedia is right, Fujitsu made the original SPARC v7 (MB86900) chips starting in 1986; T.I. didn't start SPARC manufacture until 1992 with a SPARC v8 (SPARCStation 10).
- parker_mountain 4y ago
  > Why on earth choose 68k Well, it was a good choice, because it made them money for that product line. So they must have known something (or gotten really lucky) Like I said, existing 68k applications and userbase were a huge draw. Using existing development work to establish a product line. Time tested embedded designs over the newer and less long-lived SPARC. These were never supposed to be cutting edge - that's a feature, not a bug, sometimes.
  - chasil 4y ago
    Realistically, ARM-1 tapped out on April 26th, 1995, just as Olivetti was buying Acorn. This was a year before MIPS and SPARC if I am reading the dates right. T.I. could have acquired the ARM processor. They likely would have killed it. At 25k transistors, a UNIX machine based on it would have been far more profitable than 68k. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/acorn/microarchitectures/arm1 https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/acorn/microarchitectures/arm1
    - lproven 4y ago
      You don't have your dates right. You are a decade too late. 1985, not 1995. Also, once again, it is TAPED out, not "tapped" out. I am guessing you are not a native English speaker; these two words have different meanings and pronunciations. Taped: /teɪpt/ -- rhymes with "aped" or "shaped". Tapped: /tæpt/ -- rhymes with "apt" or "clapped". The way to remember this is that the double consonant (here, -pp-) "insulates" the vowel before it from being lengthened or changed by the "-e" after it. Examples: kit → kitten, bit → bitten, flat → flattened, net → netted. Same vowel sound in all these pairs. Compare with: kit/kite, bit/bite, bat/bate, sat/sate, not/note. All these pairs have different vowel sounds because the E after the consonant changes the vowel before the consonant.
- KerrAvon 4y ago
  SPARC didn't exactly set the world on fire.
  - chasil 4y ago
    It actually blew the VAX away, and a lot of other major systems. "(1984) RISC II proved to be much more successful in silicon and in testing outperformed almost all minicomputers on almost all tasks. For instance, performance ranged from 85% of VAX speed to 256% on a variety of loads. RISC II was also benched against the famous Motorola 68000, then considered to be the best commercial chip implementation, and outperformed it by 140% to 420%." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_RISC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_RISC
  - smackeyacky 4y ago
    No but it created a lot of sales for 68k customers who needed something faster than a 68030 sun3 and a lot of FUD in a Unix industry that didnt know whether MIPS, Itanium, PowerPC or half a dozen other architectures would be good enough to fend off a rapidly improving Windows onslaught. In the end Intel played both sides of the aisle and won. Fun time to be in the industry though.
- Taniwha 4y ago
  Remember that Sun made lots and lots of 68k based systems before they built their own chips

chasil 4y ago

They were also producing SPARC chips for Sun by this point. Why on earth choose 68k when the entire market saw SPARC wiping the floor with CISC? EDIT: If Wikipedia is right, Fujitsu made the original SPARC v7 (MB86900) chips starting in 1986; T.I. didn't start SPARC manufacture until 1992 with a SPARC v8 (SPARCStation 10).

parker_mountain 4y ago
> Why on earth choose 68k Well, it was a good choice, because it made them money for that product line. So they must have known something (or gotten really lucky) Like I said, existing 68k applications and userbase were a huge draw. Using existing development work to establish a product line. Time tested embedded designs over the newer and less long-lived SPARC. These were never supposed to be cutting edge - that's a feature, not a bug, sometimes.
- chasil 4y ago
  Realistically, ARM-1 tapped out on April 26th, 1995, just as Olivetti was buying Acorn. This was a year before MIPS and SPARC if I am reading the dates right. T.I. could have acquired the ARM processor. They likely would have killed it. At 25k transistors, a UNIX machine based on it would have been far more profitable than 68k. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/acorn/microarchitectures/arm1 https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/acorn/microarchitectures/arm1
  - lproven 4y ago
    You don't have your dates right. You are a decade too late. 1985, not 1995. Also, once again, it is TAPED out, not "tapped" out. I am guessing you are not a native English speaker; these two words have different meanings and pronunciations. Taped: /teɪpt/ -- rhymes with "aped" or "shaped". Tapped: /tæpt/ -- rhymes with "apt" or "clapped". The way to remember this is that the double consonant (here, -pp-) "insulates" the vowel before it from being lengthened or changed by the "-e" after it. Examples: kit → kitten, bit → bitten, flat → flattened, net → netted. Same vowel sound in all these pairs. Compare with: kit/kite, bit/bite, bat/bate, sat/sate, not/note. All these pairs have different vowel sounds because the E after the consonant changes the vowel before the consonant.
KerrAvon 4y ago
SPARC didn't exactly set the world on fire.
- chasil 4y ago
  It actually blew the VAX away, and a lot of other major systems. "(1984) RISC II proved to be much more successful in silicon and in testing outperformed almost all minicomputers on almost all tasks. For instance, performance ranged from 85% of VAX speed to 256% on a variety of loads. RISC II was also benched against the famous Motorola 68000, then considered to be the best commercial chip implementation, and outperformed it by 140% to 420%." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_RISC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_RISC
- smackeyacky 4y ago
  No but it created a lot of sales for 68k customers who needed something faster than a 68030 sun3 and a lot of FUD in a Unix industry that didnt know whether MIPS, Itanium, PowerPC or half a dozen other architectures would be good enough to fend off a rapidly improving Windows onslaught. In the end Intel played both sides of the aisle and won. Fun time to be in the industry though.
Taniwha 4y ago
Remember that Sun made lots and lots of 68k based systems before they built their own chips