Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 23:49:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom <tom@sdf.com> To: "John T. Farmer" <jfarmer@sabre.goldsword.com> Cc: freebsd-hardware@freefall.freebsd.org, jfarmer@goldsword.com Subject: Re: supermicro p6sns/p6sas Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970929233431.5433C-100000@misery.sdf.com> In-Reply-To: <199709300608.CAA24770@sabre.goldsword.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997, John T. Farmer wrote: > The reason for AMD & Cyrix _not_ making a slot-1 is the same reason that > they don't make socket-8 cpu's, namely, patents. Intel holds patents > on both socket-8 and slot-1. Want to bet that they have/will have a > patent on the slot-2 architecture also? Which is probably what everyone has been doing already. What kind of socket does the Alpha 21164 use? How about the PowerPC 750? How about the UltraSparc? How about the R10000? How many of these socket types are patented? > Ah, for the days when socket formats/designs were open, set by industry > coalitions or organizations. When manufactours designed a "closed" > socket & watched their design-in wins drop... Huh? For CPU sockets? Manufactures always just built what they need. Besides CPU design has changed a lot. I agree with Intel's motivation to go to a SEC. It provides a package which is easier to cool for a start. Is there a "standard" SEC style design that Intel could have used instead of coming up with slot 1? > John > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > John T. Farmer Proprietor, GoldSword Systems > jfarmer@goldsword.com Public Internet Access in East Tennessee > dial-in (423)470-9953 for info, e-mail to info@goldsword.com > Network Design, Internet Services & Servers, Consulting > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.970929233431.5433C-100000>