Which is 32-bit addressing, not 64-bit. Exactly what was claimed in the comment you're responding to.
Or are you saying if the chip squanders transistors so that it's capable of 64-bit addressing, but they're useless because there's less than a GB of memory on-board, the addressing alone constitutes magic blue crystals of 64-bit legitimacy?
The horrendous handling of the Jaguar by Atari aside, and despite its unfortunate resemblance to a bedpan, it was a surprisingly powerful machine for the time, no harder to program than the ragingly successful PS2 (IMO of course), and the best way to show it off was to make full use of its 66 MHz worth of instruction issue (2 x 26.6 MHz RISC process plus a 13.3 MHz 68000 and its 64-bit memory operations. For example, the Jaguar version of Doom was the best of all ports at the time: http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Atari_Jaguar
All that said, I find reminiscing on video game consoles of the past to be a more positive experience than what this lawsuit has demonstrated about the state of patent law. Sure, Samsung copied Apple's look and feel. Why is this and why should this be illegal unless they literally slapped the word IPhone or IPad on their gadgets? Might as well have banned the Chevy Camaro for copying the Ford Mustang IMO.
> "plus a 13.3 MHz 68000 and its 64-bit memory operations"
The 68000 does not have 64-bit memory operations. It has 32-bit addressing logically, but only had 24-bit physically which cause some problems with folks who did "clever" things on the Mac.
I'll go with the traditional definition of a GPU which means goes back to the Amiga for personal computers.
> Sure, Samsung copied Apple's look and feel. Why is this and why should this be illegal unless they literally slapped the word IPhone or IPad on their gadgets? Might as well have banned the Chevy Camaro for copying the Ford Mustang IMO.
Trade-dress has a long history of protection in the US. It was part of consumer fraud protection. http://corporate.findlaw.com/intellectual-property/trade-dre...