Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!lll-lcc!unisoft!dual!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020
From: mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Thomas J Keller)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: 386 PC vs Sun
Message-ID: <1038@gilbbs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 26-Sep-86 03:14:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: gilbbs.1038
Posted: Fri Sep 26 03:14:44 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Sep-86 21:00:35 EDT
References: <4104@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: Gil's Place, Santa Rosa CA
Lines: 28
Summary: yeah, yeah...it's all done with mirrors!

In article <4104@brl-smoke.ARPA>, roberts@NBS-VMS.arpa (ROBERTS, JOHN) writes:
> > From: Joe Kwan <jhk%csun.uucp@BRL.ARPA>
> > ...I think it's save to assume that the 80386
> > is still too new (IBM doesn't have a 386 PC out yet) and too costly
> > (at least for a Compaq Deskpro 386 {for the price that they want,
> > you could almost go out and buy a Sun}) at this time to consider.
> 
> Remember that a 32-bit 80386 running at 16MHz is in the performance 
> class of a 32-bit 68020 running at ~16MHz. (Precise comparisons 
> depend on what is being done and who is conducting the tests, and
> are highly political.) The 80386 appears to have a number of distinct
> advantages over the 80286 (linear address space, on-chip MMU, etc.)
> (This based on product descriptions of the three processors, and not
> related to peripheral chips, choice of operating system, ....)

   Yeah, maybe.  But it's still got the same braindamaged instruction set and
   register complement as the 80286, 80186, 8086, 8080, 8008.  In otherwords
   it is a 32 bit high speed microcontroller chip.  Intel *STILL* hasn't
   learned how to make *COMPUTERS*.  (I doubt they ever will)

-- 

Disclaimer:  Disclaimer?  DISCLAIMER!? I don't need no stinking DISCLAIMER!!!

tom keller					"She's alive, ALIVE!"
{ihnp4, dual}!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020

(* we may not be big, but we're small! *)