[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Micro$loth Windoze 95 Badges - how they should be
- Subject: Re: Micro$loth Windoze 95 Badges - how they should be
- From: paul@serena.iaehv.nl (Paul Kolenbrander)
- Date: 1995/09/09
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc, comp.sys.mac.hardware.misc, aus.computers.ibm-pc, aus.computers.sun, aus.computers.os2, aus.computers.amiga, comp.sys.amiga.misc, comp.sys.apple2, comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc, comp.sys.intel, comp.sys.mac.programmer.misc, comp.sys.misc, comp.sys.newton.misc, comp.sys.next.misc, comp.sys.sgi.misc, comp.sys.sun.misc, comp.os.ms-windows.misc, comp.os.ms-windows.win95.setup, comp.windows.misc, comp.os.ms-windows.win95.misc
- Organization: PKS MultiMedia Consulting, your One-Stop WWW shop.
- References: <Pine.ULT.3.91.950904132020.12842B-100000@student.uq.edu.au> <42f93k$chn@data.interserv.net> <demo-0509952118130001@netblazer1-s35.telalink.net> <42ob3i$r0t@data.interserv.net> <mjoseph1-0809951250580001@b32.public.swarthmore.edu>
- Reply-to: paul@serena.iaehv.nl
In article <mjoseph1-0809951250580001@b32.public.swarthmore.edu> mjoseph1@swarthmore.edu (mathew joseph) writes:
>
> > Thirty minutes on a Mac will make me understand what? Understand that
> > I've wasted my money on dead-end hardware?
>
> This is an INCREDIBLE statement! Let me think...last I checked the
> Pentium, which performs very poorly against today's RISC processors (i.e.
> PPC, MIPS, Alpha, etc.) had absolutely no way of upgrading to a P6 since
> they use different pin designs. And last I checked the P6 ran 16 apps
> SLOWER than the P5 and and 32 bit apps only marginally faster while
> containing 5 to 6 million transistors and costing a small fortune. As for
> the P7, Intel doesn't even seem to know what they want it to do (run
> slower than the P6, perhaps?) let alone how it's going to do it. So who
> has the dead-end hardware?
I tend to agree here. I have 2 Amiga's and a 486DX-2 sitting on my desk.
I just installed a $40 software package on my biggest Amiga and it is now
a Mac. Running the latest software at speeds comparable to Mac's of equal
configuration. And that Mac is nice. Ok, not as nice as AmigaDOS, but it
is nicer than OS/2 and a lot nicer as Windows'95. And by far not as bloated
as these 2 PC OS. Face it guys, PC's, although being market leader, suffer
quite a lot from their hardware architecture. And the plethora of 3rd party
cards (none of them really standard and most needing special drivers) do
not help much here either. OK, PCI is a good start, but djeez, I've been
having PCI like features and Windows'95 like Plug'n'Play features in my
Amiga's since '85. Installing a new card. Just plug it in and the Amiga OS
will do the rest. Easy as pie.
My next system? Most likely a PowerPC type of machine...
Now all you Win'95 advocates. Before ya'll blow yer top again, have a look
at teh distribution. The non Win'95 groups outnumber the Win'95 groups by
about 4 to 1. So either limit the # of newsgroups or end this thread.
--__
/_/ |/ <A HREF="mailto:paul@serena.iaehv.nl";>E-mail.</A>
/aul |\olenbrander <A HREF="http://www.iaehv.nl/users/paul/";>Home.</A>
-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-