🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991May18.161515.22428@leland.Stanford.EDU> dhinds@elaine18.Stanford.EDU (David Hinds) writes:
>Seriously, though, (and apart from the issue of how to properly implement
>such a scheme), is this really that outrageous in principle?  I'll bet it
>would take most PC users an awful long time to use up a billion flops.  Is
>a pay-per-use scheme that unreasonable?  You could have a phone service
>type scheme, where you could pay a flat price for the chip for unlimited
>service, or various other rates depending on your level of use.  Maybe
>the chip would carry a meter, and someone could stop by to read it once
>every few months.  I might really like having the latest, fastest CPU
>available to me all the time, though I only expect to use it maybe 5% of
>that time over all.  I confess I can't think of a really good way to do
>this for PC's that would not be more trouble than it is worth.

Intel's Rent-A-Chip (tm) and Rent-to-Own services.  They could probably get
away with it only because 386s + 387s and 486s cost more than the mother board
and ram combined in many PCs.  Also it would be nice if they guarenteed the
chip while it was being rented.  The built-in part eliminates the need for a
collection service.  Rent-A-7404 might be little silly, however.

My God, what am I saying?  I hope there arn't any marketing people reading
comp.arch... 
-- 
/*  jallen@ic.sunysb.edu  */     /* Amazing */     /* Joe Allen 129.49.12.74 */
int a[1817];main(z,p,q,r){for(p=80;q+p-80;p-=2*a[p])for(z=9;z--;)q=3&(r=time(0)
+r*57)/7,q=q?q-1?q-2?1-p%79?-1:0:p%79-77?1:0:p<1659?79:0:p>158?-79:0,q?!a[p+q*2
]?a[p+=a[p+=q]=q]=q:0:0;for(;q++-1817;)printf(q%79?"%c":"%c\n"," #"[!a[q-1]]);}