HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: elgaard@diku.dk (Niels Elgaard Larsen)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Date: 9 Jan 93 13:48:43 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, U of Copenhagen

sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:

>nrabinow@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Nancy Rabinowitz) writes:
>>So, if you can't touch-type then you shouldn't think about getting a
>>Dvorak?  Isn't the physical keyboard different?

>I've never seen a physical Dvorak keyboard, though I've heard they
>exist.  If you had one, of course, you wouldn't need to learn to touch
>type.  But you should anyway, if you do any significant amount of
>computing ...  in fact, not knowing how to touch type before learning
>Dvorak is actually a plus, in my opinion: less to unlearn.

Couldn't you just rearrage the keys?
-- 
         Niels Elgaard Larsen
         Institute of Computer Science,
         University of Copenhagen, Denmark
         E-mail: elgaard@diku.dk
Newsgroups: comp.misc
From: karr@cs.cornell.edu (David Karr)
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 02:13:37 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.200048.19143@wdl.loral.com> bmk@box.ssd.loral.com (Bruce Krawetz) writes:
>I dont think hammer placement is the ONLY place it counts.  I find it
>difficult to jam the E & D hammers because the same finger is used to
>strike those keys (and my finger doesn't move _that_ fast!)

I got curious enough about this to try it out.  I have a decent manual
office typewriter.  I tried typing "ghghghghg..." as fast as I
comfortably could with alternating index fingers.  I typed a whole
line with no jams.  (Of course that just shows I have a relatively
modern machine :-).)  I did find it difficult to alternate
"dededed..." as quickly.  But I found that if I struck "E" and
immediately "bounced" down to the "D" key I could jam the typewriter,  
and I could do this trick repeatedly.  Remember, this is a typewriter
that is relatively very *difficult* to jam.

My conclusion:  Keyboard layout does not cause or prevent jams.
Poor typing causes them.

Of course I could easily be wrong, but it will take a study with more
scientific design than the one I just conducted to convince me.

-- David Karr (karr@cs.cornell.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,general
From: dblack@seas.gwu.edu (David K. Black)
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:19:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.192059.21262@mprgate.mpr.ca> vanderby@mprgate.mpr.ca (David Vanderbyl) writes:
>jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (John G Dobnick) writes:
>
>>Was "slow down the typist" the reason for QWERTY?  I don't know.  Was
>>"avoid mechanical jams" the reason?  Probably.  Are the two unrelated?
>>The Devil's Advocate in me says "No!"  In fact, I'll state that
>>QWERTY _was_ developed to _quote_ "slow down the typist" _unquote_.
>
>bzzzzt.  Wrongo.
>
>[long, meaningless argument deleted]
>
>>Point?  There's more than one way to look at this.  Just because
>>someone _says_ they are not arranging they typewriter keys to "slow
>>down" the typist, doesn't necessarily _mean_ that aren't doing that.
>>Would you _admit_ that if you were selling a product?
>
>You are completely missing the point here.  No one is arguing that
>QWERTY is not inherently slower than DVORAK.  The fact is, QWERTY
>was designed to prevent jams.  Period.  That it is slower on today's
>electronic keyboards is just an unfortunate side effect.
>
...

You're all wrong.  The QWERTY keyboard was designed so that all the
Newsgroups: comp.misc
From: carlj@hpcvmcdj.cv.hp.com (Carl Johnson)
Subject: Re: Really better? (Re: DVORAK keyboard?)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:22:23 GMT

jsue@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Jeffrey L. Sue) writes:
: I'm really curious about the contention that the DVORAK keyboard is
: really faster.  I thought I read somewhere recently that a study was
: done that brought this idea into question, if not completely dispelling 
: it.  I wish I could remember where I read this, but it seems like it was
: just a smallish article (probably just filler) - which would be difficult
: to track down.
: 
: Does anyone else out there remember reading this?

I remember an article that concluded the advantage of dvorak keyboards
was greatly overstated.  Some studies have stated that dvorak has a 2-3
times advantage based on finger movement.  This article mentioned that
they all neglected to figure the motion of the finger pressing the key,
which is the same in either case.  I believe that they concluded that
dvorak had about a 15% advantage still; not enough for a touch typist to
change over.

-- 

Carl Johnson              carlj@cv.hp.com
Newsgroups: comp.misc,general
From: white@csi.uottawa.ca (George White)
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, University of Ottawa
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 93 19:20:08 GMT

If you want to try the Dvorak keyboard with a plain DOS machine get a copy of
PC Mag, Dec. 22, 1992. There's a little routine in there that will turn your
console to a Dvorak keyboard. Be careful not to jam the keys while you're loading
it. ;)

-- 
         George M. White            |   Telephone: (613) 564-2940
         Dept. of Computer Science  |   Fax:       (613) 564-9486
         University of Ottawa       |   E-mail:    GMWSL@acadvm1.uottawa.ca
         Ottawa  K1N 6N5    Canada  |              white@csi.uottawa.ca
Xref: sparky comp.misc:4778 general:404
From: lev@spcsed3.nswses.navy.mil (Lloyd E Vancil)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: CYRIX 486/40
Date: 3 Jan 93 23:36:04 GMT
Organization: NSWSES, Port Hueneme, CA



Can anyone out there tell me if the CYRIX brand of cpu chip is
any good?

I'm pinching abe till he hollers and the local difference is
about $200.  I cound buy a tape backup for that, well close ;-)

Comments?


--
|suned1!lev@elroy.JPL.Nasa.Gov|lev@suned1.nswses.navy.mil|sun!suntzu!suned1!lev|
|S.T.A.R.S. The revolution has begun!|  My Opinions are Mine mine mine hahahah!|
Newsgroups: comp.misc
From: jgm@cs.brown.edu (Jonathan Monsarrat)
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Followup-To: comp.misc
Reply-To: poster
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Brown University
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 02:47:40 GMT

Has anyone heard of someone who's converted to the Dvorak
keyboard successfully? I'm told it's very difficult, so
I'm not sure if I should try.

-Jon
Newsgroups: comp.misc,general
From: hasker@cs.uiuc.edu (Rob Hasker)
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 02:08:56 GMT

nrabinow@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Nancy Rabinowitz) writes:

>I'd bet I type about 30 wpm or so.  The
>problem with typing tutors is you have to look at the screen to see what
>letter to type, and I have to look at the keyboard.

Typing speed tests are done by typing printed text, so I doubt you'd be
able to get 30 wpm without memorizing what you're typing.  Test
yourself:  get some text, type it in for a minute, and divide the
number of characters you've typed by 5 to get wpm.  I forget the
standard deduction for each error, I think it was somewhere between 1
and 5 wpm.  Of course, these penalties are more important when typing
on paper;  I'm not convinced that being error-free is so important
anymore assuming you're a good proofreader.

Rob
From: z_bighamcp@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Almost Free Software - Assistance?
Date: 8 Jan 93 12:38:33 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

Hi.

I've got a really good software deal that I talked my old bosses at Lotus
into when I worked for them this summer. Seems they have a basement FULL
of back releases of software for promotional purposes. All of it is
earmarked for the trash now. I talked them into letting me try get rid of
it be selling it to college students for the cost of shipping plus a
dollar or three for packaging materials. I've got a nice little post
worked up for it but my sys admin won't let me post it because he thinks
it's too commercial.

Would someone be willing to post it for me or tell me a way to post it
to a newsgroup anonymously?

Also, which newsgroups should I post it in, since I don't keep up
with the 'comp' groups.

Thanks,

Chuck
Newsgroups: comp.misc
From: ddking@dante.nmsu.edu (Dwight King)
Subject: Automatic Account Allocations
Organization: New Mexico State University
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 16:02:42 GMT


I have a unique question. I have a program that is written in C. This
program is used by the Computer Center here on Campus to grant students
accounts on the systems that are available. The student simply logs on to
the machine that they wish to work on (UNIX, VAX, Mainframe) using the ID
of accounts. This is a captive account that asks them for their Social
Security Number and their birth date. Then with this information the
captive account verifies their enrollment as a student on a central
database. If they are enrolled then the captive account then creates them
an account on that system.

What I am interested in finding out is if there is a commercial product
that would do the same thing or something similar?

I thank you for the responses before hand.
Xref: sparky comp.misc:4812 general:425
From: piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum)
Subject: ALERT Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 08:28:21 GMT
Reply-To: piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum)
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Followup-To: comp.misc

Please remove the "general" newsgroup from this thread.
-- 
Piet* van Oostrum, Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University,
Padualaan 14, P.O. Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Telephone: +31 30 531806   Uucp:   uunet!mcsun!ruuinf!piet
Telefax:   +31 30 513791   Internet:  piet@cs.ruu.nl   (*`Pete')
Newsgroups: comp.misc
From: leo@sci.kun.nl (Leo Willems)
Subject: posix
Summary: posix, how to get it
Keywords: posix 1003.7
Organization: University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 14:03:27 GMT

I am trying to get a copy of the POSIX 1003.7 (on backups) document.
Could someone mail me how to obtain these kind of documents?
(Is there a ftp site or something like that?)

Thanks.

Leo Willems
AT Computing
The Netherlands

leo@atcmp.nl
From: Brian.Milner@brunel.ac.uk (Brian D Milner)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Software Company Email Addresses / Snailmail Addresses * * * * * * * *
Date: 12 Jan 93 16:54:12 GMT
Organization: Brunel University, West London, UK


I have a student here who wants to contact a lot of big software companies.

If anyone can mail him direct at ma90gjo@brunel.ac.uk, or mail me, 
or post to this newsgroup; I'd be most damnably grateful.

Like the heading says - email or snailmail addresses happily accepted.

Thanks ...

+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Brian Milner, The Computer Centre, Brunel University , West London, UK   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|brian.milner@brunel.ac.uk | To shut down Internet; Post to the newsgroups|
+--------------------------+       saying you think 'Lost in Space'       |
                           |       is better than 'Startrek - TOS'        |
                           +----------------------------------------------+
Xref: sparky comp.misc:4827 general:428
From: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (John G Dobnick)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,general
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Date: 9 Jan 1993 01:29:58 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Reply-To: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

From article <1993Jan8.192059.21262@mprgate.mpr.ca>, by vanderby@mprgate.mpr.ca (David Vanderbyl):
> 
> You are completely missing the point here.  No one is arguing that
> QWERTY is not inherently slower than DVORAK.  The fact is, QWERTY
> was designed to prevent jams.  Period.  That it is slower on today's
> electronic keyboards is just an unfortunate side effect.

Have I missed something here?  I thought we were discussing
MECHANICAL typewriters, not modern electrically driven, or
electronically simulated, devices.   There has certainly
been sufficient HISTORY discussed -- PRE-electrical era history
at that.

-- 
John G Dobnick                          ATTnet: (414) 229-5727
Computing Services Division             INTERNET: jgd@uwm.edu
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee     UUCP: uunet!uwm!jgd

"Knowing how things work is the basis for appreciation,
and is thus a source of civilized delight."  -- William Safire


Xref: sparky comp.misc:4790 general:412
From: rick@ee.uwm.edu (Rick Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,general
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Date: 7 Jan 1993 14:57:52 GMT
Organization: Just me.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.2.33

sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
>jeq@i88.isc.com (Jonathan E. Quist) writes:
>>harris@cs.unc.edu (Trey Harris) writes:
>>BZZT!  Urban Legend Alert.  The querty keyboard was _not_ designed
>>to slow typists, it was designed to avoid jamming the typewriter.
>>Typewriters don't jam because the typist is too fast (unless the typist
>>presses one key before releasing another, which good typists didn't
>>do on mechanical typewriters) - they jam when a rapid sequence of keystrokes
>>activates hammers that are physically close together in the machine, wedging
>>them together.  To keep the mechanism as simple as possible, the hammers
>>were in the same sequence as the horizontal sequence of the keys.  The
>>querty keyboard was designed so that common keystroke sequences, _not_
>>commonly used keys, were widely distributed.  
>
>Urban legend or not, it makes more sense than your reply.  LOOK at the
>QWERTY layout: "e" and "r" right next to each other, "e" and "d" right
>next to each other, "e" and "s" right next to each other - these are
>common, VERY common key sequences.  Your answer does not make sense.
[...]

Look again... If you take a ruler (or any other straight-edge) and position
it vertically, then move it slowly from left to right over your keyboard,
you'll see the "horizontal sequence" which Mr. Quist was referring to.  It
goes something like this: 1qa2zws3xed4crf5vtg6byh7nuj8mik9,ol0.p;-/['=]\

So, between the E and R are both D and 4.  Between the E and S are 3 and X.
Indeed, the E and D *are* next to each other, but they're supposed to be
pressed with the *same* *finger*, so I don't think that they pose the hazard
of colliding hammers which the QWERTY keyboard (factually) was designed to
prevent.

Mr. Quist's correction of this erroneous urban legend is factual, and is
documented in several museums and libraries.  And if you still have doubts...

Just think:  Who would consider designing a typewriter to hinder typists?
		Maybe you had a bad experience in your typing class, but
		it would have been financial suicide for any company to
		produce a keyboard which was inherently slower than the
		many others which were available at the time.

And I don't care if Dvorak him*self* believed this myth... it just ain't so.
With the hammer-collision problem minimized, the QWERTY keyboard actually
allowed typists to type *FASTER*... and that's why it's popular today.

Rick Miller   <rick@ee.uwm.edu> | <rick@discus.mil.wi.us>   Ricxjo Muelisto
Occupation:  Husband, Father, WEPCo. WAN Mgr., Discus Sys0p, and  Linux fan
Newsgroups: comp.misc,general
From: lms@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Max Stern 310-524-6152)
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Followup-To: comp.misc
Organization: NCR (Torrey Pines Development Center)
Disclaimer: This posting does not necessarily reflect the opinions of NCR.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 23:26:48 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.211305.13643@rigel.econ.uga.edu> dwivian@helena.stat.uga.edu (Dwivian Unterschreiber) writes:

[...]
>
>I could extend your argument this way, if you like:
>Cars were designed to go fast.  An unfortunate (matter of point of
>view) side effect is that people die.  To prevent this laws were
>passed limiting the speed of cars to 55MPH, as the speed of impact
>was proven to be a leading cause of automotive fatalities[...]
>

Sorry, it's your turn to get the "bzzzt."  The 55MPH speed limit was
introduced for the primary and very specific reason of SAVING FUEL
(i.e., energy).  The saving of lives turned out to be a salutary
side-effect.  BTW, I would guess that this saving was more related to
a reduction in the NUMBER of accidents than to their severity.

Followups to comp.misc.
-- 

 |\/|  /_\  \/
 |  | /   \ /\                      Max.Stern@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com
From: vanderby@mprgate.mpr.ca (David Vanderbyl)
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Reply-To: vanderby@mprgate.mpr.ca (David Vanderbyl)
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd.
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 19:20:59 GMT

jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (John G Dobnick) writes:

>Was "slow down the typist" the reason for QWERTY?  I don't know.  Was
>"avoid mechanical jams" the reason?  Probably.  Are the two unrelated?
>The Devil's Advocate in me says "No!"  In fact, I'll state that
>QWERTY _was_ developed to _quote_ "slow down the typist" _unquote_.

bzzzzt.  Wrongo.

[long, meaningless argument deleted]

>Point?  There's more than one way to look at this.  Just because
>someone _says_ they are not arranging they typewriter keys to "slow
>down" the typist, doesn't necessarily _mean_ that aren't doing that.
>Would you _admit_ that if you were selling a product?

You are completely missing the point here.  No one is arguing that
QWERTY is not inherently slower than DVORAK.  The fact is, QWERTY
was designed to prevent jams.  Period.  That it is slower on today's
electronic keyboards is just an unfortunate side effect.

You argument is similar to this:
Cars are designed to go fast.  Going fast in a car often kills people.
Therefore, cars were designed to kill people.
From: rick@ee.uwm.edu
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Date: 8 Jan 1993 15:04:27 GMT
Organization: Just me.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.2.33

Yow!  What have I done?!?

I switched my keyboard to Dvorak, and *boy* am I typing SLOW!!

Rick Miller   <rick@ee.uwm.edu> | <rick@discus.mil.wi.us>   Ricxjo Muelisto
Occupation:  Husband, Father, WEPCo. WAN Mgr., Discus Sys0p, and  Linux fan
Newsgroups: comp.misc
From: jgm@cs.brown.edu (Jonathan Monsarrat)
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Followup-To: comp.misc
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Brown University
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:40:33 GMT

Hi Rick!

This is Jonathan Monsarrat writing to you from Brown University.
Guess what? We have a "local" group called "general" here, and
whenever someone anywhere else in the world posts to their
own "general" newsgroup, it leaks over here. Too bad!

I'd ask you to make your post "local only", but obviously you
intended to make it "world-wide" because you posted to comp.misc.

The layout for the Dvorak-keyboard is:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Esc| 1  | 2  | 3  | 4  | 5  | 6  | 7  | 8  | 9  | 0  | [  | ]  |  <-  |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Tab | /  | ,  | .  | p  | y  | f  | g  | c  | r  | l  | ;  | =  |     |
------------------------------------------------------------------- |   |
| Ctrl | a  | o  | e  | u  | i  | d  | h  | t  | n  | s  | -  |   <-    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Shift  | '  | q  | j  | k  | x  | b  | m  | w  | v  | z  | Shift |
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm told by friends that it's worth switching to the Dvorak style.
BUT -- be ready to loose any and all typing abilities in the process.
You really have to learn from the ground up to switch.

>  How does it handle international characters (umlauts, accents, etc.)?

There are no international characters on the keyboard. It's ASCII.

> What are some advantages or disadvantages of the Dvorak keyboard?
>	In short, why does it even exist?

In the old days mechanical typewriters were a lot slower than
the typists. If you typed too fast, they'd get stuck. So they
intentionally designed the keyboard to slow typists down.

The Dvorak keyboard is the "speedy" one, intentionally designed
for speed with all the keys in the middle.

-Jon
From: ophof@SERVER.uwindsor.ca (Scott Ophof)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Date: 9 Jan 1993 18:04:21 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


On 8 Jan 1993 15:04:27 GMT rick@ee.uwm.edu said:
>Yow!  What have I done?!?
>I switched my keyboard to Dvorak, and *boy* am I typing SLOW!!

Did you expect differently?  A miracle like forgetting your current
typing habits in a split second, and relearning new ones just as
fast?  (grin)

Regards.
$$/
From: lingr1000@ucsvax.sdsu.edu (ZHANG Z)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: pcfax
Date: 13 Jan 93 00:06:00 GMT
Organization: San Diego State University - Dept. of Redundancy Dept.
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1

I wonder how much pcfax systems(scanner, software boards) cost and
what are the main features to look for.
Thanks.
Zhang at lingr1000@ucsvax.sdsu.edu
From: solar@fsrg.fsrg.bear.com (William del Solar)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Parallel Transfer Cables
Keywords: chips, cables, parts
Date: 4 Jan 93 15:48:58 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bear Stearns & Company, New York, NY

In article <1993Jan4.035259.18656@nmsu.edu> willittl@spock.NMSU.Edu (William  Little) writes:
>
>
>Does anybody know any company that sells Parallel Transfer
>Cabels???
>

Try Cables & Chips, 212-619-3132 or 800-843-4117, at 121 Fulton Street,
New York, NY 10038

Wm del Solar
__________________________________________________________________________
My opinions are not those of my employer:  I do not speak for my employer.
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: DVORAK keyboard?
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, NH.
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 01:24:26 GMT

nrabinow@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Nancy Rabinowitz) writes:
>So, if you can't touch-type then you shouldn't think about getting a
>Dvorak?  Isn't the physical keyboard different?

I've never seen a physical Dvorak keyboard, though I've heard they
exist.  If you had one, of course, you wouldn't need to learn to touch
type.  But you should anyway, if you do any significant amount of
computing ...  in fact, not knowing how to touch type before learning
Dvorak is actually a plus, in my opinion: less to unlearn.

I wrote my first book using a QWERTY board at about 13 wpm - drove me
crazy.  I took some of the royalties from it and bought a software
typing tutor program, which happened to have a Dvorak learning mode
option.  I studied what this was about, and decided to go with it.  I
did not touch type at the time I switched to Dvorak, so I had nothing
to lose.

Learning to touch type with the Dvorak keyboard programmed onto a
QWERTY keyboard was actually excellent for me.  I probably would have
constantly looked at the keyboard if it matched at all.  Since I wasn't
able to, I was forced to learn touch typing.  I now type at about 60
wpm, Dvorak, where I seem to have plateaued and will probably stay.
That's fine.  Sure beats 13 wpm and having to look in two or three
places at once like I did before!

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: levine_charles@tandem.com (Charles Levine)
Subject: Re: General description of Benchmarks
Followup-To: comp.benchmarks
Organization: Tandem Computers
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 03:08:01 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.175347.29324@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE>,
ludwigt@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Thomas Ludwig) wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello folks,
> 
> Its the first time I use this possibility of communication.
> 
> My question is if anybody knows an article about benchmarks.
> That means general discussion of benchmarks, the use, the aims, ...
> 
> I hope you understand what I mean.
> 
> 					Thanks in advance
> 					Thomas "Big L" Ludwig

Check out "The Benchmark Handbook, for database and transaction processing
systems"
edited by Jim Gray, published by Morgan Kaufmann.  The first chapter
addresses some
of your questions.
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks