ExpressVPN 6.7.1 Keys By DuCkyXA Download
Hanne Rylaarsdam
Also I don't understand why Motorola switched over to PowerPC architecture instead of developing a 64-bit variant of the 68000 architecture or why they never made more powerful 32-bit processors after the 68040.
The 68000 (1979) was also from the same decade. It became affordable in the early 1980s (e.g. Apple Lisa) and slightly more so by 1984 (Apple Macintosh). However, note that Motorola also offered a version with an 8-bit external bus, the 68008, as used in the Sinclair QL. This reduced performance, but it was worth it for cheaper computers because it was so expensive to have a 16-bit chipset and 16-bit memory.
Note, this is also why Acorn succeeded with the ARM processor: its clean 32-bit-only design was more efficient than Motorola's combination 16/32-bit design, which was partly inspired by the DEC PDP-11 minicomputer. Acorn evaluated the 68000, 65C816 (which it used in the rare Acorn Communicator), NatSemi 32016, Intel 80186 and other chips and found them wanting. Part of the brilliance of the Acorn design was that it used slow DRAM effectively and did not need elaborate caching or expensive high-speed RAM, resulting in affordable home computers that were nearly 10x faster than rival 68000 machines. (The best layman's explanation of this I've seen is the Ultimate Acorn Archimedes Talk at the Chaos Computer Congress 36C3.)
Regarding the 68000, that is part of a much larger industry switch away from the CISC (complex instruction set computer) architectures of the 70s and 80s to RISC (reduced instruction set computers) which offered superior performance.
So once RISC chips offered better performance, many of the vendors using the 68000 started to abandon it. Motorola could probably have pursued the same CISC-to-RISC translation approach used in the Pentium Pro, but they already had their own RISC designs that were faster than any 68000, and with a shrinking 68000 market segment. They probably saw no market for a "68080".
Also I don't understand why Motorola switched over to powerPC architecture instead of developing a 64bit variant of the 68000 or architecture or why they never made more powerful 32bit processors after the 68040
But by them, the modern machines were powerful enough to be efficiently coded in high level languages which were more readily ported. The UNIX market demonstrated that hardware manufacturers that adopted UNIX could rapidly see vendors support their platform, regardless of the underlying architecture. 68000, PPC, PA-RISC, 88000, x86, SPARC, single processors, multi processors, etc. etc. etc. The UNIX server and workstation market was incredibly diverse, yet the overlying UNIX OS allowed vendors to quickly move their software from platform to platform.
Some dedicated Amiga fans have produced a new-generation 68000-family processor, in FPGA form. The Apollo Core 68080 seems to be considerably faster than the 68060, and has some 64-bit instructions, although it is limited to 32-bit addressing.
The 68000 had a very rational architecture for its day. A flat memory space was refreshing compared to other similar processors, and the asynchronous bus made hardware design easier, too. While most CPUs of the era assumed bus devices could perform their service in a fixed amount of time, the 68000 used a handshake with devices to allow them to take the time they needed. Most other CPUs had to provide a mechanism for a slow device to stall the bus which was complicated and, in many cases, less efficient.