Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!rutgers!mailrus!uwmcsd1!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!neighbor
From: neighbor@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Jeffrey Alan Ding)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: If the GS meant business...
Message-ID: <6267@uwmcsd1.UUCP>
Date: 23 Jul 88 19:41:01 GMT
References: <8807131148.aa01449@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA> <3214@crash.cts.com> <834@lakesys.UUCP> <3228@crash.cts.com> <6254@uwmcsd1.UUCP> <3231@crash.cts.com>
Sender: daemon@uwmcsd1.UUCP
Reply-To: neighbor@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Jeffrey Alan Ding)
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Lines: 50

>>In article <3228@crash.cts.com> maddie@crash.CTS.COM (Tom Schenck) writes:
>>>
>>>  I mean that the 6800 family is not a microprocessor, but, in fact, a small
>>
>>6800?  What computer uses the 6800 family?  The Apple ][ series computers
>>All use the 6500 family of microprocessors.  I don't know about the 6800
>
>THAT was a typo. (Yes, good flame on it too.. sheesh). What I was SPEAKING of is the 68000 (extra 0 at the end). And the //gs is built to simulate the 68000 as close as it can.

A typo?  eh?  Where did you learn to type?  If your going to reply to a
message be SURE you check what you've written so that NO ONE will misinterpret
it!

//gs built to similate the 68000?  Since when?  What part of it simulates
the 68000?   I think the //gs simulates a MAC.  This is SOFTWARE we are talking
about.  You do know the difference between SOFTWARE and HARDWARE  do you not?
You don't build a computer to simulate a microprocessor.  You make software
to simulate/imitate other software.  The //gs is perfectly capable of running
non graphical software.  And I think it does a much better job doing it too.
The MAC on the other hand has nothing but graphics so that is what it uses.
The //gs can live in two worlds, text and graphics.

Reverting back to your original posting:

>I have never really like the //gs OR the Mac (ANY of them) for any serious
>programming work. Why? Because everything you do, even if you write it in
>straight machine code, goes through an intepreter. The OS on the //gs and the
>mac has just too much overhead, and is to high-level for me to ever consider
>it as a serious programming machine.

Now this is the real argument there.  If machine language is too high-level
for you then what do you program in??  If you can program in a language that
is LOWER than machine, then tell the rest of the world and you will be
a MILLIONAIR!  (I don't mean binary either.)

Seriously now,  I really don't understand why you even care if the micro
does a little pre-processing before it performs the given instruction.  Every
instruction uses a specific number of clock cycles, and the microprocessor
is running at so many cycles per second.  If that is too slow for you then
don't use it!

>>>Tom Schenck, Member 52nd St Development Team
>>
neighbor@csd4.milw.wisc.edu


_______________________________________________________________________________
| arpanet: neighbor@csd4.milw.wisc.edu                                        |
|    UUCP: ihnp4!uwmcsd1!csd4!neighbor                                        |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~