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!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!oliveb!intelca!clif From: clif@intelca.UUCP (Clif Purkiser) Newsgroups: net.arch Subject: Re: Re: Re: Bad devices (timing loops) Message-ID: <231@intelca.UUCP> Date: Sun, 9-Mar-86 21:36:45 EST Article-I.D.: intelca.231 Posted: Sun Mar 9 21:36:45 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 12-Mar-86 21:59:10 EST References: <374@mips.UUCP> <38@gilbbs.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Intel, Santa Clara, Ca. Lines: 44 > In article <374@mips.UUCP>, mark@mips.UUCP (Mark G. Johnson) writes: > > I do not believe that it is always possible to discuss even technical > issues without occasionally making personal observations and/or comments. If, > however, it is clearly the wish of the majority of readers of net.arch that > this be the rule, I will abide by it. > > Thank you. > > > tom keller > {ihnp4, dual}!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020 > > (* we may not be big, but we're small! *) I was offended by your comments about Ken and to a lesser extent about Phil. Although this posting was much more reasonable. I think it is not only possible but very desirable to discuss computer architectures without making personal observations (i.e flames) about individuals. It would be nice if we could have this discussion without flames about individual companies. However, I guess that would be asking for the impossible. Now for something completely different A call for a discussion on new architectures. I fairly recently read the sales literature about the Cray 2 and the Fairchild Clipper. The both seem interesting. Would anyone like to post an evaluation of their architectures? I'm really tired of timing loops. -- 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. }