|
|
Posted by Jay G. on 06/07/06 11:19
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 05:27:25 GMT, Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 20:52:23 -0500, "Jay G." <Jay@tmbg.org> Gave us:
>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Channel_architecture#Why_MCA_was_not_widely_adopted
>> "MCA disappeard within a few years after the introduction of PCI which
>> provided very similar functionality."
>
> Completely wrong. MCA was already dead by the time PCI came out, and
> all of the ISA and EISA customers are the proof. NOBODY with any
> brains was buying IBM PCs. Check their sales numbers to get a clue.
That the market wasn't big doesn't mean the format was dead. You just
admitted the format still existed when PCI came out.
> PCI came out long after that, and was NOT meant to be a competing
> format. It was meant to be an entire new paradigm.
It was designed to supplant ISA which was performing the same function.
Thus, it was a competing format. The "new paradigm" was part of the
advantages it had over ISA, its competition.
-Jay
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|