In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Dexter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
>
>> I use RISC OS, as well as QL and PC ... so you are in good company :-)
>
>Risc PC 700/SA@287MHz, plus a LART (www.lart.tudelft.nl)

I am using an 'older' generation, an A3000, with upgraded SCSI 1
interface.

>> ARM have made considerable progress with the RISC chips ... they even
>> have INTEL on board now, after all these years ...
>
>I wouldn't say they have Intel on board. Intel won the intellectual
>property that is the difference between an ARM and a Digital StrongARM in
>a lawsuit with Digital. They saw the embedded marketplace as the largest
>growth area in the future, and they were right - by controlling their
>already-biggest competing product, well...

He .. he .. good to see you have not lost the scepticism :-)

>> The problem with the Motorola 68000 series is that they aren't making
>> them anymore.
>
>They do. Unfortunately, it's something of a poor relation. They're made on
>.5 or .65u processes with aluminium interconnects - generally very old
>hat. If they were fabbed at even .25u, they would happily run at
>250-400MHz speeds. But that would cost a few tens of millions of bucks ;)

Indeed ... the new development is not being invested in.

Is the supply of 68000 series still assured for the forseeable future ?

>Is there any QDOS/compatible OS that's written in C? I could try to get it
>converted to compile on ARM chips - I realize for QDOS itself that's a
>no-no, as it's basically hand assembly... what's the nearest to a version
>of QDOS written in C?
>
>Finally, with "open hardware", and/or doing it the old-fashioned way,
>what is the likely interest in a QL-compatible SBC? note the Q40/Q60 are
>not an SBC - an SBC would have the interfaces and connectors all built
>onto the same board. I can hunt around for a schematic for the original QL
>and dig out my SQB schematics and see what else could be added in... This
>isn't likely to happen, but if it was, what would people be looking for?
>
>Not getting anyone's hopes up, but asking seriously...

-- 
Malcolm Cadman

Reply via email to