Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!apple!bbn!bbn.com!slackey
From: slackey@bbn.com (Stan Lackey)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: R6000 PCs?
Message-ID: <50542@bbn.COM>
Date: 8 Jan 90 15:42:11 GMT
References: <3300092@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <3300093@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@bbn.COM
Reply-To: slackey@BBN.COM (Stan Lackey)
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Lines: 25

In article <3300093@m.cs.uiuc.edu> nelson@m.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>/* Written 11:48 am  Jan  7, 1990 by gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu in m.cs.uiuc.edu:comp.arch */
>/* ---------- "R6000 PCs?" ---------- */
>I conclude that everyone will have an R6000 (or better) in the
>(affordable) PC of the year 2000.
>/* End of text from m.cs.uiuc.edu:comp.arch */

>I truly believe that the demand for faster and faster PCs will slow down
>  quite a bit in the next few years.
>Personally, for nearly all PC applications, I think that a 386 system is
>  more than enough and most of the demand comes from people who don't 
>  need the power at all, but convince themselves (or their superiors)
>  that they need it for either ego (I need the best blah blah blah) or
>  departmental-monies-have-not-been-fully-spent-that-quarter reasons.

I don't think so.  Greater CPU power supports greater software
functionality, which increases productivity.  Suppose a cheap Killer
Micro machine on a desk, with advanced software, can make an engineer
more productive, say by running simulations super fast.  If I, as an
employer (which I'm not but if I were), had a choice of doubling my
workforce or doubling productivity at say $25,000 per seat per year,
I'm pretty sure I'd go for the Killer Micros.  Would probably make the
employees happier, encourage suppliers to make more productivity
tools, etc.
-Stan