Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!jesup
From: jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 386 machines are workstations? (Sun/386i)
Message-ID: <11876@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 28 May 90 05:49:21 GMT
References: <136288@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <6537@vax1.acs.udel.EDU>
Reply-To: jesup@cbmvax (Randell Jesup)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 20

In article <6537@vax1.acs.udel.EDU> mccalpin@vax1.udel.edu (John D Mccalpin) writes:
>(1) The NeXT machine is a pretty snappy UNIX(tm) box when running from
>    a dumb terminal. Of course, its response at the console is well known
>    as being less satisfying.
...
>(2) My primary machine has a 20 MHz R-3000 CPU --- about 17 VAX MIPS.
>    I can use up to 60% of the cpu cycles just by moving the mouse
>    quickly back and forth between two windows!  I certainly would not
>    want to run that same software on a 3 MIPS cpu!

	The motto of the programmers of the world: "Get us 5 more VUPS, and
we'll eat them for breakfast and ask for more!"

	God, 60% of a 17 VUPS machine?  I knew Unix window systems were mostly
horrible hogs, but that's ridiculous.

-- 
Randell Jesup, Keeper of AmigaDos, Commodore Engineering.
{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com  BIX: rjesup  
Common phrase heard at Amiga Devcon '89: "It's in there!"