riscy
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SIMMs

To: riscy@pyramid.com
Subject: Re: SIMMs
From: Steven.D.Ligett@Dartmouth.EDU (Steven D. Ligett)
Date: 15 Jul 93 15:27:57 EDT
Reply-to: riscy@pyramid.com
Sender: owner-riscy@pyramid.com
--- Andreas Busse wrote:
This is all more or less true. 3-chip x9 SIMMs have only few more chips than
x36 SIMMs. The discussion what SIMMs we should use had no technical reason,
just a practical. RAMs are going to be more expensive, so it would be
desirable for most of us to use the SIMMs we already *have*, and these are
1Mx9 and 4Mx9 SIMMs, with a few exceptions.
--- end of quoted material ---
I think it makes the most sense to design for what we *will be* able to buy,
not what we have now.  Building a "junk box" computer may be fun, but is a
whole different thing from designing and building a product.

SIMM "shape" is tending from the older x8 and x9 SIMMs to x32, x33, x36, and
x40 SIMMs.  Some of this is due to Wang Labs reaching out from the grave to
try to strangle other companies.  Some is due to benefits of the x32ish
shape.
 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>