- Mar 12, 2000
- 8,324
- 2
- 0
I grew up being an Atari guy. I had the Atari 800, 800XL, 130XE, and MegaST4.
I always thought the 6502 was superior to the Z80 and 8080.
Then I thought the 68K architecture was superior to the Intel x86 architecture. But Motorola couldn't keep up with Intel and the 68040 was basically the last in that line. We all explained it away by saying that Intel just had more resources available and if Motorola had the same resources then the 68K would be still alive today. However, at this time, I began to waver in my belief that the Intel x86 architecture was inferior. I began to have doubts.
Then the PowerPC came with a new RISC architecture. And it flourished. However, now we have Intel based Macs and from what I've read, the Intel based Macs are much faster than the PowerPC Macs when running native applications.
So, I think the Myth of the Inferiority of the Intel Architecture is finally dead.
I always thought the 6502 was superior to the Z80 and 8080.
Then I thought the 68K architecture was superior to the Intel x86 architecture. But Motorola couldn't keep up with Intel and the 68040 was basically the last in that line. We all explained it away by saying that Intel just had more resources available and if Motorola had the same resources then the 68K would be still alive today. However, at this time, I began to waver in my belief that the Intel x86 architecture was inferior. I began to have doubts.
Then the PowerPC came with a new RISC architecture. And it flourished. However, now we have Intel based Macs and from what I've read, the Intel based Macs are much faster than the PowerPC Macs when running native applications.
So, I think the Myth of the Inferiority of the Intel Architecture is finally dead.