CYRIX / NSM Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : CYRIX / NSM

NSM 18.27

0.0%

Jul 31 5:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Steve Porter who wrote (32186)	5/8/1999 10:47:00 PM
From: grok	Read Replies (2) of 33344

Re: <But let's be honest, almost every CPU in history was easier to work with than the 80286... sure it was successful, but I dare you to find one programmer that actually like it ;)> Yes, I agree that the architecture was awful. Of course that's true for the whole x86 line although 286 and below also lacked 32-bit addressing which the 286 really should have had. The architecture has roots all the way back to the 8-bit 8008 from 1972. But why do you wish that the 432 had succeeded. Are you telling me that you actually liked to program it. By the way, did you realize that the 432 also lacked 32-bit addressing? I think that a special place in hell should be reserved for people who have no compatibility constraint and no legacy to protect yet still product an abortion.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next