Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 13:35:30 -0400 From: Dave Alderman <dave@persprog.com> To: Randall Hopper <rhh@ct.picker.com> Cc: "Jin Guojun[ITG]" <jin@george.lbl.gov>, hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Intel Pentium II released Message-ID: <338726E2.6A9D29F4@persprog.com> References: <199705231702.KAA29056@george.lbl.gov> <19970523142235.11747@ct.picker.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Randall Hopper wrote: > Could be. The big con to this setup that I've heard of (which I'll > avoid as long as possible) is the proprietary CPU card interface. > I'll vote for a solution that lends to more vendor competition > given a choice. The other problem with this design is that it will be short lived since the Deschutes will require a revised socket (called "Slot II" I believe). With that in mind the life cycle of the Pentium II motherboards currently in use will be shorter than the Pentium Pro's. This is a great situation for large vendors, but not that great for small vendors and users. If the socket stuck around for a while and other CPU makers could use/license the connector, I would not have such a negative opinion of Slot One. As it is, I think avoiding this thing is in our long-term best interests. -- It's not my fault! It's some guy named "General Protection"! --Ratbert David W. Alderman dave@persprog.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?338726E2.6A9D29F4>