🚀 go-pugleaf

gaffo <gaffo@usenet.net> wrote:

> "David Kastrup" <David.Kastrup@t-online.de> wrote in message
> news:x5ofecf7vi.fsf@tupik.goethe.zz...
> > "Jack" <jack@norealaddy.net> writes:
> >
> > > "andrew" <andrew@killspam.gi0nwg.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > news:bJBrtJA$H4C9Ew$t@gi0nwg.freeserve.co.uk...

[snip]

> > > : http://www.emulators.com/docs/pentium_1.htm
> > >
> > > That was a very interesting article...very eye opening.  I learned a
> > > lot.  So can we surmise that people who buy P4's (in lieu of
> > > Athon's, or even PIII's !)  are either clueless dolts buying with
> > > the "huddled masses" mentality, or that Intel's marketing machine is
> > > really **that** good?
> >
> > Or that people buying a P4 have the attention span necessary for
> > reading the given web article through to the last installment which
> > says that recent versions of P4 beat the Athlons in performance, their
> > design problems notwithstanding.

[snip]
 
> Only due to FSB hike and 512-cache........the core remains
> ssssssssllllllllllllllooooooooooowwwww.

So what?  Us human beings are only concerned about the end results,
however obtained.  If the complete computer works quicker, does it
matter to us end users *why* it's quicker?

For sure the engineers designing the blasted things ought to do so in
the most elegant way possible - which means the CPUs ought to be
elegantly designed and if they're not someone ought to do something
about it, but from the end user point of view - well, so what?

[snip]

Rowland.
(who's got an elderly Motorola G4 PPC CPU in the Mac he's using atm)

[FU set]

-- 
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@dog.physics.org
PGP pub key 0x62DCCA78                      Sorry - the spam got to me
                                                 http://www.mag-uk.org
UK biker?                    Join MAG and help keep bureaucracy at bay