Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.cis.okstate.edu!newsfeed.ksu.ksu.edu!mccall.com!news.flinthills.com!news.mid.net!news.dra.com!news2.interlog.com!winternet.com!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.sprintlink.net!nntp.earthlink.net!usenet Newsgroups: alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc,alt.binaries.warez.mac,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.acorn.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.powerpc.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.machten,comp.unix.pc-clone.16bit,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.user-friendly Subject: Re: FIVE GOOD REASONS WHY IBM'S ARE BETTER THAN MACS Message-ID: <317545a9.42222736@news.earthlink.net> From: hybridv@earthnet.net (hybridv) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 19:33:29 GMT References: <4ke9k9$17v@masala.cc.uh.edu> <abrazel-1104961204470001@dial29.ppp.iastate.edu> <4kpik2$1h7e@rex.cadvision.com> <abrazel-1604961011350001@dial25.ppp.iastate.edu> <4l15rk$luq@yama.mcc.ac.uk> <dhassell-1604961912250001@m055-446-a-d1.tc.tufts.edu> Distribution: inet Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc. NNTP-Posting-Host: max1-wc-ca-27.earthlink.net X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/32.182 Lines: 40 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc:34555 alt.binaries.warez.mac:3129 comp.os.linux.advocacy:45405 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:123306 comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:21679 comp.os.msdos.misc:53319 comp.os.os2.advocacy:193265 comp.sys.acorn.advocacy:8118 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:99440 comp.sys.next.advocacy:34759 comp.sys.powerpc.advocacy:2661 comp.unix.advocacy:19223 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:17322 comp.unix.bsd.misc:731 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:2999 comp.unix.machten:2225 comp.unix.pc-clon e.16bit:651 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:9206 comp.unix.shell:31658 comp.unix.solaris:65965 comp.unix.user-friendly:3591 On Tue, 16 Apr 1996 19:12:25 -0400, dhassell@diamond.tufts.edu (David Hassell) wrote: >Based on the rest of the post (and information I have read), I think he >meant to say, "Then why have PC magazines shown that a 150 MHz PPC 604 is >faster than a 200 MHz P6?". It was a typo, and for the record, PC >magazines *have* said this... I would not expect that Intel's line will >catch up to the Power of the PPC until they switch over to using RISC. > well if you knew anything about cpus.. you would know that the p6 is a risc processor which accepts only cisc instructions then interprets them into risc instructions and there for the processing power behind it is risc.. and don't reply with bs like oh well then the interpreting of the cisc to risc slows it down... NO no NO.. the interpreter in the cpu actually can interpret faster then the clock cycles... there is no bottle neck possible then... MESSAGE FROM HYBRIDV: i have changed my style of posting if you haven't noticed yet... i really just started by correcting some bad info in this thread and got all wrapped up in the heat of the discussion.. actually if i go back and re read the posts their funny how serious everyone is... i am serious when i say that i think the pc platform is better then the mac platform... but come on some of you go way over board.... no more insults from this keyboard to all of you... if you don't understand what i'm trying to say then that is all the insult you need.... and for cyclone about that error code thingy... i did not know the error codes for the mac... and i wish i could ask you to tell me error codes for my pc but my pc never crashes and there for i don't know of any error codes... my pcs hasn't been rebooted for 1.5 weeks now..! and that's with 8+ hours use a day... well laters... i will continue to answer any questions or correct any fallacies i see.. hybridv