Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc Subject: Re: FACTS ABOUT WB2.0 (Was: Re:WB2.0 for non-A3000) Message-ID: <1991Mar9.054848.15714@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 9 Mar 91 05:48:48 GMT References: <1991Feb22.014212.681@NCoast.ORG> <1991Mar1.120528.2418@sugar.hackercorp.com> <1991Mar8.044302.28835@NCoast.ORG> Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX Lines: 53 In article <1991Mar8.044302.28835@NCoast.ORG> davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes: > What I mean is that you are getting a basically 16-bit machine to > run Unix with X, and you will have no way to ever go to 32-bit without replacing > the entire machine. Who cares what it is inside. No, that goes "who cares what it is outside?". Once you're running UNIX and X the only difference is performance. Even on a beer budget, I prefer Guinness Stout... but there are a lot more people who are satisfied with Oly. > Absolutely. Now take a look at what a machine with the vastly > better Zorro III bus would give you, running in a real, full-32 bit > environment. Since I can't afford it, it can give me nothing. And I have a lot more disposable income than the average. > Exactly. The 3000 makes an EXCELLENT Unix box. So far ahead of a > box designed to be DOS compatible that it isn't funny. There are many reasons > to go with a 3000 other than running AmigaDOS. It is simply a better > platform for Unix than any ISA or EISA system. Sure. If you can afford it. > So what. You would need more of them to accomplish the same thing, Who says I'm trying to do the same thing? Who says the same thing actually needs all that power? > and for every box you buy you need a monitor, hard drive, and the same > amount of RAM. Yep, but a mono monitor and 4 Meg of RAM is a lot cheaper. > And the performance, which is more important, is far below > that of the 3000. I really don't see what the big deal is about the 386SX > being 32-bits internally. It's not your internal speed that usually limits > Unix operations, but rather the speed of your I/O subsystem. You're hung up on quantitative differences. Tell the people who bought Microport UNIX System V/AT that there's no big deal about the 386SX being 32-bits internally. It *can* run real UNIX. No smaller processor or cheaper box I know of can. That's the bottom line. > And just as many for Amigas serving the same purpose as the PC. We can't afford Amigas in those places. The PCs give us all the performance we need and can justify. And a box sitting in a computer room just doesn't benefit from fancy graphics. People buy computers to solve problems. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' .