Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/13/84; site intelca.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!pesnta!amd!intelca!clif
From: clif@intelca.UUCP (Clif Purkiser)
Newsgroups: net.arch,net.lang.c,net.micro,net.micro.pc,net.micro.68k
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: 286 vs. 68k
Message-ID: <603@intelca.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 7-Jun-85 13:11:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: intelca.603
Posted: Fri Jun  7 13:11:14 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Jun-85 05:33:00 EDT
References: <675@dataio.UUCP>
Organization: Intel, Santa Clara, Ca.
Lines: 22
Xref: watmath net.arch:1342 net.lang.c:5357 net.micro:10701 net.micro.pc:4173 net.micro.68k:885

> Enough is enough!!!
> 
> I propose that we start a new newsgroup "net.micro.68vs286" so that
> all you people who enjoy discussing benchmarks, registers, segments,
> clock cycles and other marketing hype can do so away from the rest of
> us.  I am member of the user community, not the argueing community.
> 
> 					Bjorn Benson
> 					..!uw-beaver!entropy!dataio!bjorn

	I think Bjorn is correct in fairness to all of the people who
don't care how fast or slow (in the case of the 680xx or 320xx) a 
manufacturer's processor is.  I think we shouldn't limit it just
to the 80286 vs the 68020, so why not call it net.micro.benchmarks.

-- 
Clif Purkiser, Intel, Santa Clara, Ca.
HIGH PERFORMANCE MICROPROCESSORS
{pur-ee,hplabs,amd,scgvaxd,dual,idi,omsvax}!intelca!clif
	
{standard disclaimer about how these views are mine and may not reflect
the views of Intel, my boss , or USNET goes here. }