Welcome Notice

Register Log in

Sad day for Intel and America...

S

server

Guest
On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 09:31:11 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
<presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/1/2020 11:47 AM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 7/30/2020 5:07 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 2020-07-30 01:53, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:27:36 -0700) it happened
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
ap83ifho07dhtee9am0jc3pdpf4kiqaok3@4ax.com>:

Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.

Not really,
I remember boss called me into his office and showed me the first 386
we were working close with IBM.
What a speed!
At that time there was nothing better.

The 68020 came out a year or so earlier than the \'386.

My 68020 Amiga A1200 could run rings around a 386 Win95 machine.
Amiga OS 3.0 took up all of 4MB HDD space fully installed and
could be run from a single 880KB floppy if needed. Win95 took up
what - 40MB?

Wow, I bet all seven programs for the amiga ran so far. Did you also enjoy
your low performance, overpriced peripherals, in addition to lack of
expandability, before the entire joke died?

Very funny. Clearly you never knew much about Amigas. We\'re
talking about early \'90s technology here and sure, the Amiga died
from poor management. But did you know that milestone CGIs for

It was also a dead ended product. Are you posting from your A4000?

films like Terminator 2 and Jurassic Park were created on an
Amiga? That many server operators preferred them to PCs because

The few minutes of actual CGI in Jurassic Park were done on SGIs.
Sorry. Not sure about Terminator. Maybe they added titling to the dailies
on an amiga. Hard to say, since everything revolves around the all power
amiga.

they didn\'t crash? That NASA used them for telemetry up to the
end of the last millenium? That PowerPC Amigas were faster than

NASA isn\'t what people look upto for computing done right.
After the 1957 Sputnik scare and during the early days of the Apollo
project NASA got all the financing it wanted. It got the best
computers that money could buy, which was big mainframes in the early
1960\'s. This made it possible for some computer companies to grove
rapidly during that time frame.

However, after Apollo 11, the NASA funding was cut drastically and
NASA could not update their computer park. Thus they had to live with
old mainframes, which were modern in early 1960\'s but obsolete in the
1970\'s.
 
C

Cydrome Leader

Guest
Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/2/2020 3:01 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/1/2020 11:47 AM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 7/30/2020 5:07 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 2020-07-30 01:53, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:27:36 -0700) it happened
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
ap83ifho07dhtee9am0jc3pdpf4kiqaok3@4ax.com>:

Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.

Not really,
I remember boss called me into his office and showed me the first 386
we were working close with IBM.
What a speed!
At that time there was nothing better.

The 68020 came out a year or so earlier than the \'386.

My 68020 Amiga A1200 could run rings around a 386 Win95 machine.
Amiga OS 3.0 took up all of 4MB HDD space fully installed and
could be run from a single 880KB floppy if needed. Win95 took up
what - 40MB?

Wow, I bet all seven programs for the amiga ran so far. Did you also enjoy
your low performance, overpriced peripherals, in addition to lack of
expandability, before the entire joke died?

Very funny. Clearly you never knew much about Amigas. We\'re
talking about early \'90s technology here and sure, the Amiga died
from poor management. But did you know that milestone CGIs for

It was also a dead ended product. Are you posting from your A4000?

films like Terminator 2 and Jurassic Park were created on an
Amiga? That many server operators preferred them to PCs because

The few minutes of actual CGI in Jurassic Park were done on SGIs.
Sorry. Not sure about Terminator. Maybe they added titling to the dailies
on an amiga. Hard to say, since everything revolves around the all power
amiga.

they didn\'t crash? That NASA used them for telemetry up to the
end of the last millenium? That PowerPC Amigas were faster than

NASA isn\'t what people look upto for computing done right.

contemporary PCs? That you could run various programs at
different screen resolutions at the same time? That they came

sorry, but nobody gives a hoot about that stupid multiple resolutions at
once crap. It\'s gimmicky and completely unnecessary. It wasn\'t a solution
to a real problem.

with 4-channel stereo and 24-bit graphics when all a PC could do

So 4 channel 2 channel audio? Did your amiga come with a quad decoder too?

was bleep? That it had the largest collection of free software?

Sure, how big was that collection?

And games. I didn\'t play games much myself but PC gamers were
green with envy. Plug and Play was built-in right from the start
and never had to go through a \'Plug and Pray\' period.

Uh, that might have to do with the fact that there was nothing you could
connect to it in the first place. So yeah, no problems there.

Once, while writing an article for a national computer magazine,
I tested the Amiga\'s multitasking capabilities by running TEN
different programs, all *actively* processing some task. All of
them ran smoothly without a hiccup - on 6MB of memory *without*
any form of virtual memory. Peak usage was 5.5MB. This was at a
time when a PC struggled with two programs.

Amiga cultists are a weird type. They can\'t let go of the 47 minutes
amigas were relevant computers. Every worthless feature that nobody ever
needed or cared about was somehow Very Important. They all need to move
on. Not sure why they\'re all suck in 1987 or 1992 or whatever their heyday
was.

amigas were shitty computers enjoyed by about 78 people worldwide that
foamed at the mouth, oh and nasa, for some sort of obsolete project. The
NeXT was way more cutting edge by any measure. It also wasn\'t dead-ended
trash with nothing worth keeping. Huge parts of NeXT live on in apple\'s
osx. I\'m not an apple fan either, but even an old mac is less obnoxious
than an amiga.

As I said, you\'re funny.
Did I say that I\'m using an Amiga now? Did I say that a
30-year-old Amiga is better in every way than a modern computer?
bbbut you ran 10 programs with 6 megs of ram, aaaannddd multiple
resolutions at once!

Useless features? Then why did Wintels struggle for so long to
keep up with other more efficient systems that came built-in with
those features? Why does it have to use brute force to do what
other systems could do with a quarter of the hardware resources?
There\'s no struggle at all. Amigas we obsolete trash from the start with
the computing power of electronic coffee maker.

Let me guess: You chose the Wintel system early on and realised
that it\'s a bloated inefficient one but refused to admit it. Is
that why you\'re so antagonistic towards Amigas?
The only bloat is the fantasies of how this-and-that amigas were in the
heads of their delusional cult followers.

I\'m using Windows now, as do the vast majority of PC users
worldwide. The difference between you and other, more discerning
users is that most techno-savvy users know what a pile of bloat
it is.
Sorry dork, I don\'t consider myself \"tecno-savvy\" or whatever phoney term
you grabbed from a print copy of Wired Magazine is. I get paid solve real
problems with current technology. There\'s no nasa level of stupidity where
I work or piles of amigas and other old junk laying around in use. You and
your dusty amiga stories couldn\'t even comprehend the specifications and
power of modern computers. Anyime you hear stories about how amigas were
so awesome, you know you\'re dealing with somebody completely trapped in
the past.
 
C

Cydrome Leader

Guest
upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 09:49:15 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 01.08.20 um 08:40 schrieb Cydrome Leader:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> wrote:

Fairchild Clipper

A friend of mine was more than puzzled when he noted that
the speed of his disk driver varied from really fast to
unusable when he shifted the location of the program a few bytes,
and differently depending on the machine. It turned out
that they had simply lasered away the defective cache lines. =8()

MicroVAX

How was a scaled down and overly wimpy minicomputer better than anything
from intel? I call bullshit on this as even competing with intel for
anything but turning electricity into heat.

The point was that nothing turned out to be really better.
But I must admit that it was fun to do chip designs all alone
in your room on it. Everything was in its place.

It\'s still a weird comparison. Intel doens\'t make computers, and the uVAX
isn\'t an attempt at a new general purpose CPU.

MIPS ( I liked that one, maybe still Zombie state)

Last I looked you can still license MIPS for embedded systems, not sure if
anybody does though. I think the chinese tried something with MIPS a the
basis for one of their processors, but you know they would have skipped
the license part.

The last MIPS 4000 I have personally seen / used was the measurement
processor in a Verigy 93000 wafer tester data aquisition chip.
I think MIPS is open source now, but could be wrong.
Probably RISCV eats its lunch.

Cheers, Gerhard

I think I touched a R4400 CPU once, but again, they stopped with making
giant CPUs and it\'s all licensing for embedded systems these days. There
was the weird period of time when Windows NT 4 could run on Intel, MIPS
RISC, Dec Alpha and even IBM\'s PowerPC of all things. Even Alpha servers
with unix had some weird Microsoft code in them that came up at boot time.

Sounds like some BIOS code for bootup.

Sure the FX!32 software emulator executed x86 code with Alpha
instructions after translating in place a code snippet during first
execution. Similar to Transmeta CPUs,

Not sure what the love between DEC and Microsoft was.

Microsoft hired VAX/VMS architect Dave Cutler. The Windows NT 3 (and
NT 3.51) internals are very similar to VMS corresponding structures.
Unfortunately much of this healthy architecture was lost when Win 3
and Win95 features had to be included,
What was \"lost\"? The original NT had no backward compatibility with
Windows 3.1 software. As you said, they started to add this, but I\'m not
aware of anything that was removed to make this happen- other than in
Windows 2k you could use fat32 and skip NTFS.
 
P

Pimpom

Guest
On 8/6/2020 11:30 AM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/2/2020 3:01 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/1/2020 11:47 AM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 7/30/2020 5:07 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 2020-07-30 01:53, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:27:36 -0700) it happened
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
ap83ifho07dhtee9am0jc3pdpf4kiqaok3@4ax.com>:

Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.

Not really,
I remember boss called me into his office and showed me the first 386
we were working close with IBM.
What a speed!
At that time there was nothing better.

The 68020 came out a year or so earlier than the \'386.

My 68020 Amiga A1200 could run rings around a 386 Win95 machine.
Amiga OS 3.0 took up all of 4MB HDD space fully installed and
could be run from a single 880KB floppy if needed. Win95 took up
what - 40MB?

Wow, I bet all seven programs for the amiga ran so far. Did you also enjoy
your low performance, overpriced peripherals, in addition to lack of
expandability, before the entire joke died?

Very funny. Clearly you never knew much about Amigas. We\'re
talking about early \'90s technology here and sure, the Amiga died
from poor management. But did you know that milestone CGIs for

It was also a dead ended product. Are you posting from your A4000?

films like Terminator 2 and Jurassic Park were created on an
Amiga? That many server operators preferred them to PCs because

The few minutes of actual CGI in Jurassic Park were done on SGIs.
Sorry. Not sure about Terminator. Maybe they added titling to the dailies
on an amiga. Hard to say, since everything revolves around the all power
amiga.

they didn\'t crash? That NASA used them for telemetry up to the
end of the last millenium? That PowerPC Amigas were faster than

NASA isn\'t what people look upto for computing done right.

contemporary PCs? That you could run various programs at
different screen resolutions at the same time? That they came

sorry, but nobody gives a hoot about that stupid multiple resolutions at
once crap. It\'s gimmicky and completely unnecessary. It wasn\'t a solution
to a real problem.

with 4-channel stereo and 24-bit graphics when all a PC could do

So 4 channel 2 channel audio? Did your amiga come with a quad decoder too?

was bleep? That it had the largest collection of free software?

Sure, how big was that collection?

And games. I didn\'t play games much myself but PC gamers were
green with envy. Plug and Play was built-in right from the start
and never had to go through a \'Plug and Pray\' period.

Uh, that might have to do with the fact that there was nothing you could
connect to it in the first place. So yeah, no problems there.

Once, while writing an article for a national computer magazine,
I tested the Amiga\'s multitasking capabilities by running TEN
different programs, all *actively* processing some task. All of
them ran smoothly without a hiccup - on 6MB of memory *without*
any form of virtual memory. Peak usage was 5.5MB. This was at a
time when a PC struggled with two programs.

Amiga cultists are a weird type. They can\'t let go of the 47 minutes
amigas were relevant computers. Every worthless feature that nobody ever
needed or cared about was somehow Very Important. They all need to move
on. Not sure why they\'re all suck in 1987 or 1992 or whatever their heyday
was.

amigas were shitty computers enjoyed by about 78 people worldwide that
foamed at the mouth, oh and nasa, for some sort of obsolete project. The
NeXT was way more cutting edge by any measure. It also wasn\'t dead-ended
trash with nothing worth keeping. Huge parts of NeXT live on in apple\'s
osx. I\'m not an apple fan either, but even an old mac is less obnoxious
than an amiga.

As I said, you\'re funny.
Did I say that I\'m using an Amiga now? Did I say that a
30-year-old Amiga is better in every way than a modern computer?

bbbut you ran 10 programs with 6 megs of ram, aaaannddd multiple
resolutions at once!

Useless features? Then why did Wintels struggle for so long to
keep up with other more efficient systems that came built-in with
those features? Why does it have to use brute force to do what
other systems could do with a quarter of the hardware resources?

There\'s no struggle at all. Amigas we obsolete trash from the start with
the computing power of electronic coffee maker.

Let me guess: You chose the Wintel system early on and realised
that it\'s a bloated inefficient one but refused to admit it. Is
that why you\'re so antagonistic towards Amigas?

The only bloat is the fantasies of how this-and-that amigas were in the
heads of their delusional cult followers.

I\'m using Windows now, as do the vast majority of PC users
worldwide. The difference between you and other, more discerning
users is that most techno-savvy users know what a pile of bloat
it is.

Sorry dork, I don\'t consider myself \"tecno-savvy\" or whatever phoney term
you grabbed from a print copy of Wired Magazine is. I get paid solve real
problems with current technology. There\'s no nasa level of stupidity where
I work or piles of amigas and other old junk laying around in use. You and
your dusty amiga stories couldn\'t even comprehend the specifications and
power of modern computers. Anyime you hear stories about how amigas were
so awesome, you know you\'re dealing with somebody completely trapped in
the past.
I have better things to do than continue a fruitless argument
that has degenerated to cherry-picking and juvenile insults. I\'m
off on a trip for a few days. Have good day.
 
R

Ricketty C

Guest
On Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 1:52:23 PM UTC-4, Pimpom wrote:
On 8/6/2020 11:30 AM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/2/2020 3:01 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/1/2020 11:47 AM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 7/30/2020 5:07 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 2020-07-30 01:53, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:27:36 -0700) it happened
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
ap83ifho07dhtee9am0jc3pdpf4kiqaok3@4ax.com>:

Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.

Not really,
I remember boss called me into his office and showed me the first 386
we were working close with IBM.
What a speed!
At that time there was nothing better.

The 68020 came out a year or so earlier than the \'386.

My 68020 Amiga A1200 could run rings around a 386 Win95 machine.
Amiga OS 3.0 took up all of 4MB HDD space fully installed and
could be run from a single 880KB floppy if needed. Win95 took up
what - 40MB?

Wow, I bet all seven programs for the amiga ran so far. Did you also enjoy
your low performance, overpriced peripherals, in addition to lack of
expandability, before the entire joke died?

Very funny. Clearly you never knew much about Amigas. We\'re
talking about early \'90s technology here and sure, the Amiga died
from poor management. But did you know that milestone CGIs for

It was also a dead ended product. Are you posting from your A4000?

films like Terminator 2 and Jurassic Park were created on an
Amiga? That many server operators preferred them to PCs because

The few minutes of actual CGI in Jurassic Park were done on SGIs.
Sorry. Not sure about Terminator. Maybe they added titling to the dailies
on an amiga. Hard to say, since everything revolves around the all power
amiga.

they didn\'t crash? That NASA used them for telemetry up to the
end of the last millenium? That PowerPC Amigas were faster than

NASA isn\'t what people look upto for computing done right.

contemporary PCs? That you could run various programs at
different screen resolutions at the same time? That they came

sorry, but nobody gives a hoot about that stupid multiple resolutions at
once crap. It\'s gimmicky and completely unnecessary. It wasn\'t a solution
to a real problem.

with 4-channel stereo and 24-bit graphics when all a PC could do

So 4 channel 2 channel audio? Did your amiga come with a quad decoder too?

was bleep? That it had the largest collection of free software?

Sure, how big was that collection?

And games. I didn\'t play games much myself but PC gamers were
green with envy. Plug and Play was built-in right from the start
and never had to go through a \'Plug and Pray\' period.

Uh, that might have to do with the fact that there was nothing you could
connect to it in the first place. So yeah, no problems there.

Once, while writing an article for a national computer magazine,
I tested the Amiga\'s multitasking capabilities by running TEN
different programs, all *actively* processing some task. All of
them ran smoothly without a hiccup - on 6MB of memory *without*
any form of virtual memory. Peak usage was 5.5MB. This was at a
time when a PC struggled with two programs.

Amiga cultists are a weird type. They can\'t let go of the 47 minutes
amigas were relevant computers. Every worthless feature that nobody ever
needed or cared about was somehow Very Important. They all need to move
on. Not sure why they\'re all suck in 1987 or 1992 or whatever their heyday
was.

amigas were shitty computers enjoyed by about 78 people worldwide that
foamed at the mouth, oh and nasa, for some sort of obsolete project. The
NeXT was way more cutting edge by any measure. It also wasn\'t dead-ended
trash with nothing worth keeping. Huge parts of NeXT live on in apple\'s
osx. I\'m not an apple fan either, but even an old mac is less obnoxious
than an amiga.

As I said, you\'re funny.
Did I say that I\'m using an Amiga now? Did I say that a
30-year-old Amiga is better in every way than a modern computer?

bbbut you ran 10 programs with 6 megs of ram, aaaannddd multiple
resolutions at once!

Useless features? Then why did Wintels struggle for so long to
keep up with other more efficient systems that came built-in with
those features? Why does it have to use brute force to do what
other systems could do with a quarter of the hardware resources?

There\'s no struggle at all. Amigas we obsolete trash from the start with
the computing power of electronic coffee maker.

Let me guess: You chose the Wintel system early on and realised
that it\'s a bloated inefficient one but refused to admit it. Is
that why you\'re so antagonistic towards Amigas?

The only bloat is the fantasies of how this-and-that amigas were in the
heads of their delusional cult followers.

I\'m using Windows now, as do the vast majority of PC users
worldwide. The difference between you and other, more discerning
users is that most techno-savvy users know what a pile of bloat
it is.

Sorry dork, I don\'t consider myself \"tecno-savvy\" or whatever phoney term
you grabbed from a print copy of Wired Magazine is. I get paid solve real
problems with current technology. There\'s no nasa level of stupidity where
I work or piles of amigas and other old junk laying around in use. You and
your dusty amiga stories couldn\'t even comprehend the specifications and
power of modern computers. Anyime you hear stories about how amigas were
so awesome, you know you\'re dealing with somebody completely trapped in
the past.

I have better things to do than continue a fruitless argument
that has degenerated to cherry-picking and juvenile insults.
That eliminates about 99% of the post in this group.


I\'m
off on a trip for a few days. Have good day.
Enjoy. It\'s nice to hear from someone who is willing to discuss things rationally and without resorting to vitriol.

--

Rick C.

--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
Toggle Sidebar

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Top