> I stil stand by everything I wrote in my last message in this thread.

I'm looking forward to you addressing the points I made in my reply to that message.

> All that would be required in such a license, would be the legal use of
> the Motorola name on the Chinese chips, and the 680x0 designs.

Would such license even go as far as allowing the Chinese brokers to claim "Motorola" as the chips' manufacturer and allowing the Chinese manufacturer to falsely designate the chips as having both MMU and FPU when in fact it has none?

> My speculation is no less valid than yours or the Wolfman's, but
> evidently he does not like being called on his

Actually, your evidence is flawed as I *love* being called on what I write. It must have to do with the old "do unto others..." saying I guess.

> due to his anal tendencies

Now that's funny. You dismiss my (and Jim's) speculations and conclusions only to come up with your own speculations and conclusions (which are in no way making any more sense than ours) about this topic which you say you're not really interested in, and yet dare to call me "anal".

> no one has proof yet.

What I would accept as proof is running those alleged 133 MHz chips reliably at 133 MHz (or more), not just at about 80 MHz, which also a 75 MHz part can do easily.