HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mbs@adastra.cvl.va.us (Michael B. Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Jerry "knows" 486's faster than 68040.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: adastra!mbs@Virginia.Edu
Date: 7 Apr 92 20:26:02 EDT
Organization: Private UUCP Node

In article <1992Apr7.201127.7425@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> nap42487@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Nishith A. Patel) writes:
>it is interesting how whenver Amiga owners are faced with evidence proving
>slower performance, they say, well it depends on the OS and the compiler
>and blah blah blah.
>
>All this proves is that compilers on Amigas suck, which means their
>applications will suck. And the OS sucks, so do not say anything more about
>how great your OS is, because you just claimed that it sucks.

And you just proved that you have no idea what the word "logic" means.

Go read an IBM or Mac newsgroup. Please.
--
  //   Michael B. Smith
\X/    ...!uunet!virginia!adastra!mbs
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: laire@uni-paderborn.de (Ralph Schmidt)
Subject: Re: 040 and 486 and nap42487 knows nothing about CPUs.
Organization: Uni-GH Paderborn
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 07:11:06 GMT

jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:

>peterk@public.sub.org (Peter Kittel) writes:
>>
>>>Wow.  For a man of your education, a PhD, your attitude sure is arrogant.
>>
>>Well, I always *try* to be polite, but I don't always succeed.
>>
>>Yes, I really bash on Intel, I have very bad experiences with their
>>design, and this I reported. And I got the impression that this opinion
>>is shared by all people I know that come from the same experience,
>>having programmed both brands. Why on earth is that arrogant?
>>

>Assuming that your opinion is shared by everyone else *is* arrogance.
You should read Peter's comment a little bit better!!!!!!
He wrotes that "this opionion is shared by all people I know that come
                                        ------------------------------
from the same experience"
------------------------
Next time you should take a deeper look into the messages of someone
and not read that that you want to read. This is no flame only a correction.
BTW why not stop this silly 40 strikes 486 and 486 is always better than 40
war that looks like 2 priester fighting for their religion:-)
Peter, the priester of the 68000 religion thinks that he's near by god:-)
and Jerry,the priester of the neverending Intel religion, is claiming that
he has the Mask of Truesight:-)
Ehmm..do anybody of you think that the he can confince the other one...nah
i don't think....BTW in both countries you can choose your religion free so
let them do it and don't care if the other one choose the wrong one:-)
BTW i have chose the right one....I guess:-)...and it's not the pope;-(

Bye...
>>
>>It appears more to me that you yourself don't really know much about
>>all this stuff, so I would recommend you to check your wording and your
>>real knowledge about the subject a bit better in future before posting.
>>

>Oh, *IT APPEARS TO YOU*, I see.  Why don't you tell me *why* it appears to
>you that I don't know much about this stuff?  Could it be because I have the
>temerity to disagree with thee?  A thousand pardons...

>>
>>Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel
>>
>--
>+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
>| Jerry J. Shekhel  | Molecular Simulations | Time just fades the pages      |
>| Drummers do it... | Inc.  Waltham, MA USA | in my book of memories.        |
>|    ... In rhythm! |     (617) 890-2888    |              -- Guns N' Roses  |
>+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
>|           ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry             |
>|                            jerry@polygen.com                               |
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
-- 
Ralph Schmidt                                            laire@uni-paderborn.de
University of Paderborn (Germany)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: davidme@qdpii.comp.qdpi.oz.au (David Meiklejohn)
Subject: Re: C= policy (Re: Apple problems "Home computer")
Organization: Qld Dept Primary Industries
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 06:28:57 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.215805.8775@nic.unh.edu> ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene) writes:
>
>	Complete 486 systems have been under 3000 for a while now.  You could
>  buy a 33/486 with 4 meg memory, 130 meg HD, SVGA card w/1mb, and a monitor 
>  for around 2800 back in july of last year.  Thats from Gateway 2000 also,
>  a pretty good clone company. 
>
>							G.Greene

Except that I'm in Australia, and thats Aussie dollars, not US.  A$3000 is
under US$2500, which is very low, compared to what we've been paying here
until recently.


-- 

David Meiklejohn                  | Internet : davidme@qdpii.comp.qpdi.oz.au
Computer Systems Officer, QDPI    | Fax      : +61 70 92 3593
Mareeba, Australia                | Voice    : +61 70 92 1555
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: 040 and 486_ (bunch O' Kaka anyway)
From: jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz (John Bickers)
Date: 17 Apr 92 17:30:08 PST
 <1992Apr15.112639.29149@nic.unh.edu> <1992Apr15.224149.1414@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> 
 <1992Apr16.210231.1706@ux.acs.umn.edu> <1992Apr16.220121.17234@ctr.columbia.edu>
Organization: TAP, NZAmigaUG

Quoted from <1992Apr16.220121.17234@ctr.columbia.edu> by jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel):

> Uh-huh.  Tell me, Pete, why must one tune a machine that comes with the OS
> pre-installed and supposedly ready to go?

    Apparently because as delivered, it may trash your HD (in the case of
    Windows). Other than that, some folks prefer to set things up optimally
    for themselves. Like removing Windows from a PClone because it slows
    things down - stuff like that.

> | Jerry J. Shekhel  | Molecular Simulations | Time just fades the pages      |
--
*** John Bickers, TAP, NZAmigaUG.        jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz ***
***    "Radioactivity - It's in the air, for you and me" - Kraftwerk    ***
Xref: sparky comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:12229 comp.sys.amiga.games:6743 comp.sys.amiga.misc:8317 comp.sys.amiga.multimedia:799 comp.sys.amiga.graphics:3562 comp.sys.amiga.hardware:8599
From: murphy@gibbs.physics.purdue.edu (William J. Murphy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.games,comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.multimedia,comp.sys.amiga.graphics,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Date: 9 Apr 92 15:57:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: dirac.7192
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Organization: Purdue Univ. Physics Dept, W.Lafayette, IN

In article <1992Apr4.170302.12128@cs.mcgill.ca> jerry@cs.mcgill.ca (Gerald (Jerry) KUCH) writes:
>In article <1992Apr3.204240.1975@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> nap42487@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Nishith A. Patel) writes:
>>Also, I challenge Amiga owners to run their fastest serious app (as in their
>>fastest CAD program, spreadsheet, or other processor intensive app for high
>>end work) and compare it to the speed of the fastest app for that purpose
>>available for the IBM under OS/2 2.0 (or a Windows app under Windows 3.1)
>
>Ok, so let's run Bob's Software Inc.'s "DildoCAD" on the Amiga, and then we
>should compare it to SuperDuperInternationalMegaBusterKillerCorp's 
>"BlazingDeathFastCAD" on the 486.  Sounds like a reasonable way to compare
>the raw performance of the systems they're running under...

I did this a few years back, Manx C 3.6 (I think) vs MicroSoft C 5.0.  I ran
the Manx on an A2000, MSC on a 386 Zenith.  The A2000 had 2 floppies and
3MB RAM, the PC had 80MB HD, 5MB RAM, and was 16 MHZ.  I compiled Tony
Richardson's PLPlot library on both.  Guess which one was faster?  The
Amiga!!  I think the main reason was on the Amiga, you could make the
compiler resident using ARes or some such.  On DOS, I have never seen
a mainstream compiler that could be used as a TSR, so you have to 
load the compiler for each file you are compiling.  What a joke!

Bill Murphy               | Old Home Cottage Cheese:  The only cottage 
			  | cheese that's not made from formaldehyde, 
murphy@physics.purdue.edu | arsenic, or rodent parts.
From: jayson@tbag.UUCP (Jayson Phillips)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: AMax/A3000 vs Low-Cost-Macs, Quadras...
Date: 10 Apr 92 05:35:32 EST
Organization: Tampa Bay Amiga Group

>From: bmccnnll@unix1.tcd.ie (Barry McConnell)
>Subject: Re: AMax/A3000 vs. Low-Cost-Macs, Quadra...
>Date: 11 Mar 92 
>In <1992Mar10.135205.1171@ms.uky.edu> justin@mikky.edu (Justin Sullivan)
>writes:
>
>>Jayson Phillips writes
>
>>It is also very easy to see that many Amiga/AMAX users do not have any  
>>practical Mac experience. What a shame.. And then try to run the stuff on 
>>their Amiga? Without color? You could NEVER call Amax a "viable" platform..
 
I did not say this.  I'm well aware that many Macs are currently used
with mono monitors and that these systems provide good utiltiy.
 
>So you're saying that the millions of Macs out there that *don't* have colour
>are not "viable platforms"?? Get real. People used Macs for YEARS on
>monochrome screens and were perfectly content with their little world.
 
To reiterate, I know that lots of people still use mono Macs for terminals,
word processing, DTP, number crunching, process control, etc.  I have
previously advocated that AMax/A3000 combo makes a pretty darn good (fast)
Mac with 85% more screen (pixels) then Mac+/SE/SE_30/Classic/ClassicII.
 
>And when you *do* try to use colour on a Mac... well, it's quite funny,
>actually. A friend of mine ran a Dhrystone speed test on his IIsi (20Mhz 
>68030), and got _half_ the result in 256 colour mode than he did in 2 colour
>mode. I ran Dhrystones on my Amiga in 2,4,8,16 colour mode, and there was
>absolutely *no* slowdown between the different modes.
>
>Barry.
 
                            _        _   _   _   _
  Jay Phillips  /\  |\/| | / _  /\   _) / \ / \ / \ 68030/68882-25MHz
  Tampa FL USA /--\ |  | | \_/ /--\  _) \_/ \_/ \_/ 6MB-RAM   Q105-HD
  -------------------------------------------------------------------
  USENET: tbag!jayson@uunet.uu.net                GENIE: B.Phillips13
  -------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: markb@csg.uwaterloo.ca (Mark Brezina)
Subject: Re: Mac OS just sucks -- "ease of use" = "lack of freedom"
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 20:18:22 GMT

In article <Paula_Lieberman.04oy@amicol.UUCP> Paula_Lieberman@amicol.UUCP (Paula Lieberman) writes:
>It was MACINTOSH users using MACINTOSH ram-loaded MACINTOSHES and in one
>case a 32 MB Sun-4 file servers outputting Postscript files to LASERWRITERS
>with max'ed out memory who were complaining about ~rPostscript -- they were
>has gone very deep into Postscript writing software for his clients -- I
>don't take the complaints of such people about Postscript lightly.  Just
>because something is a de facto standard doesn't mean it has problems! The
>graphics artist told me that until recently, in fact, the color imaging
>model used in Postscript was WRONG! Something about the angles that the
>publishing and color output, so I don't see what she -wouldn't know what
>she was talking about! 
>
>
	I believe you.  There are problems with postscript on the Mac.  I
watched in horror last week as my Mac II turned a 3k text file into a 495k
Postscript file!  Like what the hell kind of Postscript implementation is that?

	I thought "this must be a mistake, there is no way the file should be
that big".  But when I examined it with MacWrite, it was a Postscript file.
About 1/3 of it was function definitions and the rest of the file was hex
digits. 

						Mark Brezina
						Computer Engineering Undergrad
						University of Waterloo.
From: mr_scary@lakes.trenton.sc.us (Chris Hurley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac OS just sucks -- "ease of use" = "lack of freedom"
Date: 7 Apr 92 17:59:34 GMT
Organization: The Greg Lake Fan Club

gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:

> Yeah, I have a couple of these utilities for the Amiga.  One is "Mega-
> Workbench", and the other is "MWB".  They both allow superbitmapped
> Workbench screens, as large as available chip memory will allow.  Of
> course, people will argue, "but you have to scroll the screen...  you
> cannot see everything at once..."  Sure, that is true.  So what.  At
> least they are free, and they work.
> 
> -- Gerald

Workbench 2.04 incorporates this feature as well, to memory limitations.
From: fihsu@athena.mit.edu (Hsu I-wei)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: To Nish...answer, please.
Date: 17 Apr 92 13:32:06 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <1992Apr17.150319.1@cc.helsinki.fi> lindblad@cc.helsinki.fi writes:
>In article <1992Apr15.224149.1414@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, nap42487@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Nishith A. Patel) writes:
>
>> Why do we even bother talking about this? It is obvious we are not going
>> get exact equal comparisons, so we should do this the easy way. Get 
>> a magazine that has already tried comparing the two and read their results
>> (like I said before, something like a UNIX magazine that tested a common
>> operating system, etc.)
>> 
>> Another reason why we should do this, instead of talk about testing, is,
>> that the benchmarks have to be comprehensive to some point. They should 
>> actually DO something, 
>
>And you still don't get it.
>	It was not the question which systems have better compilers nor was the
>question about software algorihms. It was about CPU speed.
>
>[comments on the invalidity of benchmarks deleted]
>
>Nish, why have you not yet answered my question I've asked you about 5 times:
>what, in your opinion, makes 80486 superior in speed when compared to 68040?

Nish based his conclusion on a benchmark.  ;)  Also, I think his claim really
was that a 50 Mhz 486 would be faster than a 25 Mhz 040 on both integer and
floating point.  As for comparing both 25 Mhz versions, Nish claimed that the
486 had a slight edge on integer, and that the 040 was about 1.5 times fast on
floating point.  Personally, I think that the 040 is at least as fast as the
486 on integer, and clearly faster than the 486 on floating point.  If this is
true, then the 040 is a faster chip at the same clock speed.

>Is it the instruction set? I doubt that. Is it the amount of register shuffle?
>I don't think so. Is it because it has unified cache with no copyback? No, it
>can't be. Is it because it's instructions are 30-50% slower than equalent
>68040 instructions? What makes the 80486 a faster CPU in your mind?

Could you PLEASE post some numbers regarding comparison of equivilant
instructions???  I don't doubt your word, but I'd like to see some quantative
proof aside from benchmarks.  (A long time ago, someone did post some numbers
comparing equivilant 040 and 486 instructions.  That person only compared
integer instructions, and didn't bother posting numbers comparing floating
point.  He/she said that the difference in floating point was ridiculous. _I_
however would like to see a comparison of equvilant floating point along with
integer.  >:)

>
>--
>Jarkko Lindblad
>lindblad@cc.helsinki.fi
> 

Francis
From: root@rkamiga.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:    Mac OS just sucks -- "ease of use" = "lack of freedom" ?
Distribution: world
Date: 9 Apr 92 20:23:04 EST
Organization: Rick's Amiga

In article <1992Apr8.125201.7858@ms.uky.edu> justin@mik.uky.edu (Justin Sullivan) writes:
>>     So Apple actually say "A/UX 3.0 is SVR4", do they (seriously, I don't
>>     know - I _thought_ they didn't say that about any A/UX)?
>> 
>>     If they don't, then the question becomes "why doesn't it have SVR4
>>     in the name, BTW?".
>
>This is getting silly.. For the same reason no other SVR4-UNIX has "SVR4" in  
>it's name. IRIX 4.0.x doesn't. Solaris doesn't. AmigaUNIX doesn't say "SVR4" in  
>it's name...

But IRIX, ESIX, ISC, DELL, Commodore, MST, Consensys, and a bunch of other
vendors all advertise the fact that they are built from AT&T SVR4 sources.

Apple doesn't.  Apple says that they are SVR2 compatible for A/UX 2.0.

From what I have seen on comp.unix.aux, no one is claiming that A/UX 3.0
is SVR4 compatible.

--
Rick Kelly		Rick's Amiga		Framingham, Mass.

		think!unixland!rmkhome!rkamiga!root

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: njg2@po.CWRU.Edu (J. Norell Guttman)
Subject: Anyone See the New Video from Def Lepord
Reply-To: njg2@po.CWRU.Edu (J. Norell Guttman)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 19:14:44 GMT


Hi Guyz and Girls:
	Has anyone seen the new video "Adrenialize" from
Def Leapord (I HATE HEAVY METAL MUSIC)!!!!!  However they
had nice graphx which looked like something from Imagine
or Lightwave 3D... anyone know what it was done with?

OBamiga:  C= better have a better cheaper machine or else
I am going to be very very very very very very ANGRGY!!

				AMIGA RULZ!

					J.Norell Guttman
					njg2@po.cwru.edu
From: skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu (Skip 'AdaX' Sauls)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Mac & IBM advocates read this!
Date: 9 Apr 92 01:18:33 GMT
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science

Mac & IBM advocates:

Just out of curiosity, what other newsgroups do you guys read?  I sometimes
read the Mac groups but I cannot ever recall seeing any posts by Corey Hauer
or Justin Sullivan, but Evan Torrie seems to show up on occasion.  As I do
not frequent the IBM/PC groups, I do not know about about the posters there.

This is not meant to start a flame-war (although I would not be surprised if
some fool edits the post to make it look like it is), I just want to know 
whether or not you read and post to other groups.  After reading the Mac 
groups I can see why you would rather hang around here, as they are usually
boring unless Apple has recently introduced some new technology.  I used to
think that comp.sys.mac.advocacy was needed, however, Mac owners seem to be
past the insecure stage that Amiga owners (myself included) are stuck in.

While I have shouted "go away" as loudly as other Amiga advocates here, I
realize that without you guys here to constantly annoy us, we would have 
very little to talk about.  It also proves that the status of the Amiga has
improved considerably over the last few years.  We used to argue with the
Atari ST owners while the Mac and IBM owners just ignored us.  Now, the ST
is dead, the Amiga lives on, and Mac and IBM owners somehow feel threatened
by the Amiga, even though we do not have SVGA, QuickTime, OS/2, Pink, Casper,
SoundBlaster, etc., etc.

Considering how little the Amiga has changed/improved over the years, it is
amazing how the attitude towards it has.

Skip Sauls                     //    Graduate Student & Instructor
skip@tacky.cs.olemiss.edu    \X/     CS Department, University of Mississippi 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: matt@gbrmpa.gov.au (Matt Crowd)
Subject: DMI is nothing like a CHA-WA VGA card, was Re: Intel HW
Organization: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 09:39:27 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.040950.316@seas.gwu.edu> gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>>gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington) writes:
>>>We were comparing performance.  Price is another issue.
>>>
>>
>>OK, if price is not an issue, then it's not fair to compare the DMI to the
>>SVGA, is it?
>
>How so?  They are both processor-driven graphics card that give 8-bit,
>high resolution graphics.
>
>-- Gerald

Yeah, but the DMI uses a 34010 (TI) CPU, and the clones use the old
charlie-cha-wa graphics chip.

matt.
From: reaper@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Jason Butler)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Amigas Announced!!!!
Date: 13 Apr 92 02:50:37 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University

Mike_Whalen@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Mike Whalen) writes:

>In a message dated Sat 11 Apr 92 10:18, Reaper@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (jaso
>wrote:

> R> Personally, Bud Dry is my favourite.  Also: Bud, Busch Light, Genuine
> R> Draft,
> R> and about anything else.  Of course I ofter opt for a cold shot of
> R> Jack
> R> Daniels green label most of the time.

>  Wait.. you actually LIKE Panther Urine (read: American Beer). What about
>Guiness Extra Stout? What about Harp? What about Chimay Ale?)

>  Jeez.


Yes, I do like American beer!  Although I do like Becks as well
|        Jason Daniel Butler            |       Amiga 3000 25/50 6 MEGS    |
|     reaper@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu     |    //                            |
|Computer and Technologies Theme Program|   //  The Design Crew makes it,  |
|          <CATT> at  NCSU              | \X/  The users make it possible! |
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: gerald@seas.gwu.edu (Gerald G. Washington)
Subject: Re: 040 and 486_
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 04:16:08 GMT

jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>lindblad@cc.helsinki.fi writes:
>>Please, stop writing your clueless postings as you do not seem to know
>>anything about what your talking about.
>>
>
>Ha!  And you do?!  Really Jarkko, you did *just* what Nish did.  You posted
>benchmarks which prove your point.  BTW, it's well known that HP's 040
>machines do about twice as well on benchmarks as other 040 machines.  They
>obviously found a way to optimize their compilers to fool the benchmarks.

I thought Mr. Lindblad's point was that the benchmarks proved nothing.
Anyway, it does not seem like benchmarks for different processors could
be too accurate.

-- Gerald
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: skipper@motaus.sps.mot.com (Skipper Smith)
Subject: Re: Jerry "knows" 486's faster than 68040.
Organization: Motorola Semiconductor, Austin, Texas
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 22:11:28 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.205227.1@cc.helsinki.fi> lindblad@cc.helsinki.fi writes:
>In article <1992Apr7.155403.1226@nic.unh.edu>, pss1@kepler.unh.edu (Paul S Secinaro) writes:
[...]
>> 
>> It's going to be pretty hard to quantify the performance benefits of
>> different cache architectures on paper.
>
>Well, most (all) magazines and books tend to notify that separate caches are
>better in multitasking environment.

Actually, the performance gain is quite easy to point out.  With a single MMU
and a single, unified cache, the processor is able to fetch an instruction OR
a piece of data from the cache OR from memory.  The 68040, on the other hand,
is able to fetch (courtesy of its' two MMUs and split caches) an instruction
from the instruction cache, data from the data cache, AND (thanks to the
greater intelligence of the bus controller) be writing data across the data
bus (or spend its time doing bus snooping to support copy-back mode- something
the i486 is not capable of).  Three operations instead of one, all at the same
time, is considered a win by most industry pundits who have their head some
where that isn't dark and smelly.


-- 
Skipper Smith                             | skipper@wmtowdc.sps.mot.com
Motorola Technical Training               | 8945 Guilford Rd  Ste 145  
All opinions are my own, not my employers | Columbia, MD 21046