Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 00:21:26 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

On 1/12/25 7:07 AM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

On 2025-01-12, 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
 

    The 8086 would have been better, but the extra wiring apparently
    would have pushed up the price too much according to some old
    interview with an IBM guy.
    They didn't KNOW it would be super-successful, so they kinda
    hedged their bets, split the diff. 640k banks were a hell of a lot
    better than 64k banks.

 
The 64K barrier was alive and well on the 8086/8.
I wrote a lot of horrible code to deal with large arrays. Then there
were all the memory models: tiny, small, large,
huge... yuck.
 

    The instructions for the 8088 were "familiar" to anyone who did
    the 8008/8080 and not TOO far from Z-80 sensibility - so I think
    that cinched Intel as the maker. WISH they'd used the 68000s. Ever
    see the Sage boxes ... gone alas before I could afford one .......

 
I got into the Amiga and enjoyed the 68000 that way.

 
   Alas I spent big $$$ and bought the very first Amiga model. NOTHING
   but "Guru Meditation" errors ... dumped the thing and bought a PC
   clone.

I didn't have anything that sophisticated; I bought a 68000 evaluation
board. I also have my Captain Zilog t-shirt from a Z8000 seminar but I
never had one in my hands. I don't know how much Exxon had to do with it
but it quickly became apparent the Z8000 was an 'also ran' and the Z80000
never hit the streets. I loved the Z80 but Zilog did a lot better dropping
zeroes than adding them. The Z8 lives on but a $200 development kit isn't
very attractive.