🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <25FE7267.24003@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn) writes:
|In article <29474@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@pepsi.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) writes:
|$But that doesn't have anything to do with 286 or 386. WfW doesn't (I
|$believe) do anything special on a 386. I don't think 123 R3 does either.
|$So getting a 386 for these programs is pointless.
|
|   I can't agree with that, Phil.  I don't consider upgrading a CPU to
|be useful only if it lets you do things you could never do before.  I
|also consider it useful if it speeds up the slower things you used to
|do.

Now you're changing the subject of the discussion. The original
question was, is it worth the extra money to get a 386? Some claimed
that the hope of 32-bit software was worth spending extra money
now. There were allusions to the capabilities of the mentioned
programs to use a 386, which I questioned. If you simply want
a faster clock rate processor, then that's a different question.

|   Personally, I can't wait to get my hands on my new 386SX system
|(I'm currently using a 12 MHz 286), and it isn't because I want to
|run OS/2 V2.0 or anything like that.

Then why aren't you getting a 20 MHz 286 which is cheaper than
a 16 MHz 386sx? Or even a 25 MHz 286?

--
Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com		{uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil
Boycott the census! With the history of abuse census data has,
do you really trust the government?