Posted by Roy L. Fuchs on 01/17/16 11:49

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 21:54:56 -0500, Justin <nospam@insightbb.com> Gave
us:

>Roy L Fuchs wrote on [Mon, 05 Jun 2006 01:50:19 GMT]:
>>>On Sun, 4 Jun 2006 18:52:10 -0500, "Jay G." <Jay@tmbg.org> Gave us:
>>
>>>On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 12:41:40 GMT, Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:43:12 -0500, "Jay G." <Jay@tmbg.org> Gave us:
>>>>
>>>>>It's only proprietary if it doesn't become the new standard.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong. IBM fully intended to reap license fees throughout the
>>>> lifespan of the micro-channel bus.
>>>
>>>My bad, I misunderstood the word proprietary. I was thinking in terms of
>>>limited use, not in terms of private ownership.
>>>
>>>>> There are
>>>>>almost always competing formats.
>>>>
>>>> That is not why it went under. It was the fastest, best
>>>> implementation yet. It still died, however.
>>>
>>>It was a competing format to ISA, and eventually PCI.
>>
>>
>> No. It was a competing standard to EISA, and beat it due to the
>> fact that EISA was locked at 7MHz bus speeds. It was around long
>> before PCI ever even came out, and even died before PCI hit the
>> markets.
>>
>>> Its advantages over
>>>ISA were not enough for most people to switch initially,
>>
>> It was well over twice as fast, being a 32 bit bus, and ISA being a
>> mere 16 bit bus. The reason it died is because IBM wanted money from
>> peripheral device makers. It wouldn't surprise me if they didn't want
>> money for drivers (from driver authors) as well.
>>
>>> especially since
>>>it wasn't backwards compatable with ISA.
>>
>> It was never meant to be. It was yet another attempt by IBM of
>> controlling an entire market.
>>
>>> Later, when something more
>>>powerful than ISA was needed, PCI was a much more attractive format.
>>
>> You seem to always forget that EISA came out long before PCI did.
>> PCI was also a tertiary bus and had direct access to the cpu, and ALL
>> peripherals and other busses were subordinate to it.
>
>VLB was also in there.

VLB died because it cost more for a manufacturer to implement. It
took an extra connector, and cost more gold to plate the fingers on
PCB card edges. That adds up in M+ piece manufacture quantities.

It was also a fairly poor version of an early 32 bit schema.
Destined to die out before it even got started.

[Back to original message]