🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <20993@winchester.mips.COM>, mash@mips.COM (John Mashey) writes:
> In article <4392@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
> >But... isn't the truth an absolute defense against a charge of slander?

> >Or is that libel?

> OK, it's really time for this one to stop cold; in my opinion, this is
> a new low for comp.arch.

I assume you picked my message to reply to because it happened to be
the one you were reading when you reached flashpoint. This is, I think,
the only message I have written in this chain, and is not intended as
a slam on intel's engineers, either individually or as a group. They
have, given what they have to do, done a decent job with the 386. The
people I'm unhappy with are the people who made the market decisions
that lead to the current IBM/intel/64-k-segment morass in the PC world.

So, basically what I'm saying is that you're attributing to me a series
of messages that do not represent my opinions. And that, unfortunately,
I haven't been following closely.

Anyway, that's not very nice.

With one exception, we seem to be in close agreement.

> 	In any case, X86s are not remotely near being giant turkeys.

Have you spent any significant amount of time trying to make large
programs run well on the 8086 and/or the 80286? I have, and I think
the phrase 'giant turkey' is far too kind a term.
-- 
Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation.

Business: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180.
Personal: ...!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.hackercorp.com.