On May 26, Ken Seefried wrote:
> Subjective, but fair enough.  I can say that my ISI 68010-based VME machine 
> (4.2BSD) was quite a bit slower than the 11/780 (4.[23]BSD) I had access to, 
> and that my 386/33 under Linux 1.0.x was faster, subjectively.  Arm wrestle 
> for whose subjective view is right? 

  Yes, definitely subjective...indeed nowhere near a fair comparison
because the '730 was running VMS and the Sun2 was running UNIX.  So,
apples & oranges.  But that was the performance I saw. :) It was not
my intention to represent my Sun2 vs. VAX-11/730 performance
observations as true benchmarking of any kind, and I apologize if my
statement suggested otherwise.

> >   My old VAX-11/730 would kick the crap out of pretty much any i386,
> > though, when actual multitasking was involved.  
> 
> As apposed to that fake multitasking?  Anyone want to benchmark, say, a MV2 
> (definately faster than an 11/730) and, say, a Compaq SystemPro/386?  I know 
> where I would place my bet. 

  "Actual multitasking" meaning, say, starting a big "make" in two
different windows at the same time.  Doing that on my PIII-600
(running Linux) completely buries the machine, even with fast SCSI
disks...while my old MicroVAX-II didn't even feel the bump.

  The metric is "doing twice as much work and getting a factor-of-two
slowdown" vs. "doing twice as much work and getting a factor-of-TEN
slowdown".  Granted the last time I touched that P-III box was about
year ago, but somehow I doubt things have changed much since then.

> > Don't underestimate
> > the power of a well-designed architecture like the VAX.  Or, more to
> > the point, don't OVERestimate the suckfulness of a horribly-designed
> > architecture like x86!  
> 
> With all due respect (and I do indeed have great respect for Dave), I think 
> the only thing that I underestimate is the devotion that people have to 
> their favorite architecure, or their distaste for anything Intel, facts be 
> damned. 

  *sigh* I "do computer stuff" for a living, and will use (and
recommend) the best tool for the job no matter who made it.  I've not
any job that an Intel box is better at than a well-designed computer,
except for perhaps sitting on a suit's desk running PowerPoint
presentations.

  Facts be damned, indeed.  Don't you mean "x86 is better, observations
and experience be damned!"?

  I don't think x86 sucks because I dislike it...I dislike it because it
sucks.  Please (and I ask you this sincerely, as a fellow
professional) try to understand the distinction.  I'm guilty of many
things, but disliking x86 for "religious reasons" is simply not one of
them, contrary to likely appearances and many accusations by the "lets
put PeeCees everywhere!" crowd.  Please don't jump to conclusions.

  Further...my anti-x86 sentiments have nothing to do with its
manufacturer...Intel has produced several really good CPU
architectures over the years; x86 just isn't one of them.  (Indeed,
one of their better ones, the 8051, is being produced in quantities of
more than a million chips per month, and I'm writing code for one in
another window right now) When I took over the project I'm working on,
I had the opportunity to move away from the Intel [8051] architecture,
but I didn't because it was a good choice.  So you see, I don't
dislike Intel for the sake of disliking Intel, as many people seem to.
I don't even really dislike them...I just dislike some of their
designs, specifically the ones that suck.

> If I had a dime for every time I heard: 
> 
> "If <insert your favorite dead and buried CPU architecture> ran at as fast a 
[snip]

  ...and if I had a dime for every time I heard an x86 proponent label
ANYTHING that isn't x86-based PC as "dead and buried", "legacy",
"proprietary", etc etc etc...

  Indeed, the Pentium4 is falling short of Intel's sales projections (or
wishes?) by orders of magnitude, and Itanium is dead-on-arrival, and
people are moving away from Microsoft Office in droves due to the
forced-upgrade licensing crap that's about to be put into effect.  Do
you REALLY think that side of the industry is going to last much
longer?

> I'm sure the buggy whip guys said something similar about Ford. 

  Oh yes, so everything other than x86 is old legacy stuff that's "just
hanging on" because of the sad devotion of the people who won't "join
us in the present day" and move everything to PeeCees, because
obviously PeeCees are the way of the future!

  Umm, I have a bridge for sale.  Interested?

> Sorry to bust your chops, Dave. 

  No offense taken...sorry to bust back.  I have no interest in
participating in a flame war with you, and I apologize for having
inadvertantly started one.  But simply, your attitude seems to reflect
the opinion that the x86 is the end-all, be-all of computing, "where
the world is going" and so forth, and it just so happens that I know
better...so I had to speak up.  I'm sorry to disagree with you, for I
have great technical respect for you as well.

  I really should learn to ignore stuff like this, I suppose.

      -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire                       "Actually, I've found that I rarely wear
St. Petersburg, FL                    pants in Florida." -Sridhar