home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
- Path: sparky!uunet!rde!ksmith!keith
- From: keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith)
- Subject: Re: AMD and INTEL
- Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC
- Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 02:48:49 GMT
- Message-ID: <1992Jul23.024849.15148@ksmith.uucp>
- References: <1992Jul20.142137.503@tamsun.tamu.edu> <1992Jul20.155024.11256@clpd.kodak.com> <1992Jul20.181728.3039@nic.unh.edu>
- Lines: 32
-
- In article <1992Jul20.181728.3039@nic.unh.edu> pss1@kepler.unh.edu (Paul S Secinaro) writes:
- >In article <1992Jul20.155024.11256@clpd.kodak.com> fischer@li.serum.kodak.com (Chris Fischer (x39613)) writes:
- >>Speaking of AMD and Intel, I was perusing the AMD literature
- >>for their 386 line and found this tidbit:
- >>
- >>"Only the Am386DX architecture can run UNIX, OS/2 and MS-DOS."
- >>
- >>I think AMD should inform my PC at home about this. It
- >>disagrees.
- >
- >Well, it didn't say only the Am386DX could run UNIX, OS/2, and MS-DOS,
- >it said only the Am386DX *architecture* could run those things. Since
- >the chip is a clone of the Intel 386, I guess it's technically true,
- >though a tad misleading.
- >
-
- No, Not at all. This was quoted out of context (can YOU say ELBIL
- YLOH?) ...
-
- AMD Sells a wide variety of different CPU's but for the widest software
- support ..
-
- >>"Only the Am386DX architecture can run UNIX, OS/2 and MS-DOS."
-
- It is a bit amusing though.
-
- I mean if the subject of the literature is AMD Microprocessors, I think
- the statement is perfectly valid.
- --
- Keith Smith uunet!ksmith!keith 5719 Archer Rd.
- Digital Designs BBS 1-919-423-4216 Hope Mills, NC 28348-2201
- Somewhere in the Styx of North Carolina ...
-