🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov16.123221.9069@qb.rhein-main.de>, vhs@rhein-main.de (Volker Herminghaus-Shirai) writes:

| > I'd like to hear from RISC architects and implementers on this topic. Given
| > all the touted advantages of RISC, why aren't they blowing Intel away?
| 
| Too many computer-illiterates getting caught by M$'s and intel's
| marketing hype.

  How about this: people are buying the hardware which runs the software
they want to use, and which is cost effective. In the real world the
cost of solution of a problem is the issue. As long as vendors insist on
packaging a product at $399 for DOS and $7000 for workstations the high
end will stay with Intel for many problems (unless you need a LOT of
power).

  Just because people don't do what you think they should doesn't mean
they're confused, it may mean you don't understand their problem. If the
software I need to run will run on an Intel machine (or perhaps only an
Intel machine), if I didn't go with Intel I wouldn't just be "computer
illeterate," I'd be stupid.

  Of course Intel may have opened the door by not shipping the P5 when
they said they would. Not only are lots of people unhappy because they
now have to use another vendor to get the performance they need, but
software has been ported from DOS to other systems because there was
(and is) no faster chip.

  I think Godot would have been a better name for the P5 then Pentium,
but by 1995 production quantities should be available.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    Keyboard controller has been disabled, press F1 to continue.