Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!spdcc!merk!alliant!linus!bs From: bs@linus.UUCP (Robert D. Silverman) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Next computer (Re: CISC Silent Spring) Message-ID: <94307@linus.UUCP> Date: 6 Feb 90 13:54:18 GMT References: <8859@portia.Stanford.EDU> Reply-To: bs@gauss.UUCP (Robert D. Silverman) Organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford MA Lines: 22 In article <8859@portia.Stanford.EDU> underdog@portia.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) writes: :My suspicions are confirmed. The NEXT computer is in trouble. : :NEXT can only be saved if Steve Jobs replaces the 680X0 :with RISC processor like the Sparc chip. In all compute ^^^ :intensive applications, the Sparcstation I beats the NEXT :timewise. Worse, NEXT costs MORE than a Sparstation I. Try to be a little less dogmatic please. Your use of the word 'all' leaves a little to be desired. I have applications that involve a lot of multi-precise integer arithmetic and rely heavily on integer multiply and divide with remainder. These applications run faster on the NEXT (and on the SUN-3/80 on my desk) than they do on the Sparcstation I. -- Bob Silverman #include Internet: bs@linus.mitre.org; UUCP: {decvax,philabs}!linus!bs Mitre Corporation, Bedford, MA 01730