Re: Avatar

[voss@i40s16.ira.uka.de (Stefan Voss)]

In article <ofStuaq00WB9NEFHcP@andrew.cmu.edu>, ag4e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Arthur T. Gola) writes:
|> [stuff deleted]
|> 
|> lets get real here.....do you want a backwards technology machine here??
|> Why in the world would anyone want to use a 65C816 as the main processor
|> on a new computer.....one that would be supposedly powerful enough to
|> co-process 680XX machines, as well as 80X86 machines...yes it [65816] is
|> a very powerful chip...but it is not as powerful, as a matter of fact no
|> where near as powerful as todays technologies computers...
|> 

All Apple IIs used and use a 65xxx processor. That's one of the features that
makes them Apple IIs. IMO, if any new 'Apple II' doesn't use a 65xxx 
(65832 preferred ;-)), it doesn't deserve to be called an Apple II.
Although I'm aware of lacking the power of today's CPUs, I think a 15 or 20 MHz
65xxx plus some coprocessing could compete with newer CPUs.

|> If you want Nintendo games....Buy a nintendo....

All I want is a better Apple II.

Just my 2 cents,

Stefan Voss
(voss@ira.uka.de)