HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jfc@athena.mit.edu (John F Carr)
Subject: Re: 486/66 .. Into a 486/50 motherboard?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 01:04:25 GMT

In article <BzFnyr.IHI@wimsey.bc.ca> sl@wimsey.bc.ca (Stuart Lynne) writes:
>Since 20 nanosecond SRAM still needs wait states to run with 33 Mhz clock I 
>suspect it will be a while before DRAM gets fast enough to run with no 
>wait states at 50 Mhz :-)

I had assumed that the 20 ns caches advertised with 486 systems were 0
wait state.  Is this not true?  How many bus cycles does it take for a
(33, 50) Mhz 486 to read (a word, a cache line) from a 20 ns secondary
cache?

--
    John Carr (jfc@athena.mit.edu)
Xref: sparky comp.sys.intel:2833 comp.sys.mac.hardware:24858 comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware:34111
From: jiu1@husc11.harvard.edu (Haibin Jiu)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: 486 vs. Mac Benchmarks
Date: 24 Dec 92 04:51:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Dec23.235116.18812
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

Who ever said Microsoft Windoze [3.1] is a fast performer?  If you
want a fast GUI on the Intel platform, check out OS/2 2.x....

HBJ
Xref: sparky comp.sys.intel:2845 comp.unix.sys5.r4:1043 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:919
From: bernard@cpio1.fr.mugnet.org (Bernard Fouche)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: ADAPATEC 1542B, TWO SCSI DISKS AND DELL UNIX
Date: 28 Dec 92 18:53:50 GMT
Organization: CPIO S.A.


I still have a strange problem with a Dell 450/SE : I have an adaptec
1542B and two SCSI disks. While I had only one disk, I encountered no
problem. But since I installed a new disk, I see these messages on the
console :

WARNING: SCSI: HA 0 - Incoming message not found

and nothing more. The system runs correctly, I just see that sometimes
on the screen.

But we also have a 433/SE and the story is nearly the same : one
ADAPTEC 1542B and one drive, no problem. Two drives and then the
message happens (Incoming message not found) ! However, when I perform
a job that requires a lot of transferts between the two drives, the
system hangs : I can still have acces to "/" or "/usr", but not to
"/usr3" (the slice representing the whole second drive). If I do a
ls(1) on /usr3, I can't even kill ls(1) afterwards and my session is
hung. The only solution is to reboot and then everything works fine.
When I say 'reboot', it doesn't mean to switch the power off and on
but to type 'init 6 < /dev/console' ( if I still can !)

Of course, I looked at terminators, drive numbers, etc.

PLEASE, HELP! I NEED TO FIX IT QUICK !!!!!! ANY HINT WELCOME !
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernard Fouche  VOX   : +(33) (1) 48.04.56.30  FAX :  (33) (1) 48.04.98.95
Email : bernard@cpio1.fr.mugnet.org
Postal Mail : CPIO S.A., 13-15 Rue de la Verrerie, 75004 Paris, France
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: endian, what is it?
Date: 1 Jan 1993 22:31:33 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <1992Dec21.101455.15024@csus.edu> eburk@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu (Eli Burk) writes:
>howdy
>What is "big" endian and "little" endian? How do they relate
>to 386 and 486?

These terms are no longer PC and highly offensive to liberal microprocessors.
Please use the term "native binary format".

One binary format puts maps multi-byte numbers to memory addresses in a way
compatible with the way we write out numbers (highest order first), and the
other maps numbers in the proper direction (lowest order byte first).  If this
were a Motorola newsgroup, we'd reverse our assessment here of who is correct,
of course.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
From: eburk@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu (Eli Burk)
Subject: endian, what is it?
Originator: eburk@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu
Organization: San Francisco State University
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 10:14:55 GMT

howdy
What is "big" endian and "little" endian? How do they relate
to 386 and 486? I am not certain if "big" and "little" are
the correct modifiers.

** email please **



-- 
Basic training in the techniques of cheerleading, including arm motions, cheer-
leading rountines, voice projection, double stunts, pyramid design, along with
a development of safety guidelines, crowd control and teamwork. [class at UNLV]
eburk@futon.sfsu.edu -or- eburk@sutro.sfsu.edu -or- eburk@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu
From: bohlkejh@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Aplha vs. Pentium
Date: 31 Dec 1992 18:53:03 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department at Rose-Hulman
Reply-To: bohlkejh@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: manager.nextwork.rose-hulman.edu

In article <00965E8C.5E07CBC0@vms.csd.mu.edu> 2760carpente@vms.csd.mu.edu  
(METALLICA) writes:
> This question has been bugging me for a while and so I finally decided to  
post
> it.  The new chip from DEC (Alhpa) is going to run Windows NT along with VMS
> and UNIX.  If a 'Alpha' PC is running Windows NT, will this PC be faster than  
a
> 'Pentium' PC running Windows.  I mean, are these CPU's comparable...?  I am
> assuming that the Alpha PC will be better and faster... Any comments..
> Benchmarks..  
> Have a great new year everyone..
It all depends on what DEC machine you run it on.  It might be compareable to a  
DEC AXP 3000-500, but that is the low end dog.  

Jon
From: Thomas.Tornblom@nexus.comm.se (Thomas Tornblom)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Cyrix 486SLC/DLC compatibility issues and NextStep....
Date: 21 Dec 92 13:04:23 GMT
Organization: Communicator Nexus AB


I've been following the discussion on the different x86 processors
with some interest as I have a Sun386i with a 20 MHz 38{6,7}DX pair.
I've been thinking of replacing the 386 with a Cyrix 486DLC, which
would be a pop-in. My concern is how is cache coherency handled in
this (or these kind of) processor? I assume that the cache can be set
up only to cache RAM, but what about DMA transfers? Is the cache
controller part listening to DMA requests or does it flush the cache
on bus requests? 

I'm not all that familiar with the intel junk, I've mostly been
working with Motorola 68k family processors.

I'm also interested in how to set up the 486DLC cache.

Note that this machine runs SunOS, not messy dos or windoze.

Thanks,
Thomas
--
Real life:      Thomas Tvrnblom           Email:  Thomas.Tornblom@Nexus.Comm.SE
Snail mail:     Communicator Nexus AB     Phone:  +46 18 171814
                Box 857                   Fax:    +46 18 696516
                S - 751 08 Uppsala, Sweden
Xref: sparky comp.sys.intel:2823 comp.arch:11898
From: b645zjx@utarlg.uta.edu (STEPHEN HUFNAGEL)
Subject: Re: Can 16MHz 80387 be installed in a 33MHz 80386 system?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 07:00:00 GMT

>: > I have been told that you can install a 16MHz '387DX in a coprocessor
>: > socket to work with a 33MHz '386DX and it will work ok (running Math
>: > instructions at the 16MHz rate).  I am not convinced.  Has anyone done
>: > this?  How does it work?  Are their any jumpers that must be set?

  This will only work if the systems mother board is designed to do it.  
I had a 20 MHz 386 with a 16 MHz 387 socket (at the time there was no 20 Mhz
387) about four years ago, but the 387 socket had its own 16 MHz clock.

  Unlike the main processors you must NEVER run a 80x87 faster than the rated
speed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: an1060@anon.penet.fi
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Parallel Algorithms
Date: 26 Dec 92 18:19:04 GMT
Organization: Anonymous contact service
X-Anonymously-To: comp.sys.intel

X-Anon-To: comp.sys.intel


Hello,

I have the following book for sale:

Analysis & Design of Parallel Algorithms: Arithmetic & Matrix Problems
by Lakshmivarahan & Dhall, 1990.

It is in new condition (the binding will "crack" when opened)!!!

Publishers Price: $44....I ask: $35

Please respond to:  mantell@ams.sunysb.edu

Thanks

Abe

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
From: tdbear@dvorak.amd.com (Thomas D. Barrett)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: 486/66 .. Into a 486/50 motherboard?
Date: 24 Dec 92 15:53:55 GMT
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.; Austin, Texas

In article <BzFnyr.IHI@wimsey.bc.ca> sl@wimsey.bc.ca (Stuart Lynne) writes:
>
>With a properly designed board there will be no difference in bandwidth due
>to changing between 33 & 50 Mhz. This assumes that the board is designed to 
>accomodate both speeds and the BIOS knows how to setup the RAM access wait
>states properly for the oscillator speed and RAM speed.

Actually... no.  You did point out the main memory changes, but the
VL-Bus or PCI-Bus will be running at a different rate.  In the case of
the 50, it might be at 50 or it might be a 25 (something to watch out
for).  With the 33, it will be 33.  

>Once it does this it makes no difference whether you are running 33 or 50. You
>are accessing the RAM as fast as you can. The *only* way that there would be
>a difference would be if your RAM was fast enough to run without wait states
>with a 50Mhz clock. 

DRAM or SRAM?  DRAM will run 0ws in page mode at 25MHz.  The rule of
finding out which is faster is to use (1/clock-speed) * (number of
waitstates+2+n), where the clock speed is the memory controller clock
and the number of waitstates is the number of memory waitstates and "n" is
the fudge factor (0<=n<=1).  The reason why it is the number of memory
waitstates and the reason why there is a fudge factor is that some
manufacturers operate a 50MHz DX on a 25MHz bus (which can wind up
being slower than a DX2/50).

>Since 20 nanosecond SRAM still needs wait states to run with 33 Mhz clock I 
>suspect it will be a while before DRAM gets fast enough to run with no 
>wait states at 50 Mhz :-)

It depends on the design... 20ns SRAM can access data in 20ns.  Since
the 33MHz cycle time is a minimum of 60ns, this leaves 40ns for the
address to propogate out of the cpu (~15ns), to be looked-up in the
tag (~20ns) and enough ready setup time for the 486 (~5ns)... it's tight,
but it can work.  Some less expensive caches can't handle it and do
have to use interleaving or adding of one waitstate.

>Does anyone out there know how fast memory would have to be to be used without
>wait states by a 50Mhz 486?

If you mean SRAM... 20ns is plenty fast for the data for direct mapped
caches.  But, the tags need to be about 10ns :)

-- 
|Tom Barrett (TDBear), Sr. Engineer|tom.barrett@amd.com|v:512-462-6856 |
|AMD PCD MS-520 | 5900 E. Ben White|Austin, TX  78741  |f:512-462-5155 |
|"No is yes, And we're all free"   |CO made a #2 no-no... PU!          |
|My views are my own and may not be the same as the company of origin  |
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 20:49:37 EST
From: <RFM@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Seeking info re Intel computer

I've come across an ad for an Intel 300LPSX, a slimline 386sx/16, 40
meg hd, 3 1/2" dr & VGA (built-in?), for a very good price (under $500)
brand new. Seems to me would be a good system for word-processing apps,
maybe some games. Anybody out there know about this system? Is it
reliable? I can live with the speed as ong as I know it will just keep on
chugging along.
Thanks in advance for any/all replies.

BobM, PSU-Harrisburg
From: xchen@staccato.rutgers.edu (Xinghao Chen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: extra COMMAND copy in memory: HELP WANTED.
Keywords: unwanted extra command copy in memory
Date: 21 Dec 92 16:35:52 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.



My wife and I recently have put together a PC-386/33 with SVGA, 8MB
memory and 162MB (formated) HD disk space. We load the bear system
with MS-DOS 5.0. The problem is this: once we loaded the DOS
(and nothing else) and used
    mem /c | more 
to check out the memory status, there would be two COMMAND file copies
located in the conventional memory. There two copies were of different sizes. 
As we understood, we only need one COMMAND file copy being loaded into
the memory. We don't know how did the second copy come into the memory.  

The second problem is that once we load the DOS, it would fail if we
try to switch to drive A (or B) in the case that there is no formated
flopy diskett in the drive. 
In some cases after responde to the
  "Abort, Retry or Fail", we would get the following message (in big font):

  NO ROM BASICS
  SYSTEM HALTED

Once this occurs we have to reset the machine.
As we understood, even if the A drive (or B drive) had no diskett in,
typping A: followed by RETURN should still bring us to the DOS prompt
A:\>.

 We thank for any advice in regard to correcting these two problems.
 Please forward your advices to xchen@caip.rutgers.edu.

 Thanks.

 -Chen
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: 486 vs. Mac Benchmarks
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:39:21 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.224200.22219@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> merrifie@cidmac.ecn.purdue.edu (Michael C Merrifield) writes:

>
>        "Recent Studies Reveal 25MHz Is Now Faster Than 50MHz"
>
>"Ingram Benchmark Results, March 1992 - 25 and 33 MHz 040 Macintosh Quadra
>Outruns the 486 at 33 and 50 MHz."
>
>"This revelation is brought to you by the Apple Macintosh and the Motorola
>68040."  The add goes on to say that Ingram Labs (an independent PC testing
>firm) compared the newest 040 Macs (Quadra 950 and 700) to several of the
>quickest 486 Windows PCs running the most popular applications for both
>Macintosh and Windows 3.0 (such as Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Wingz, PageMaker,
                       ^^^ Oh goody. Why not use go whole hog here and
                           use Windows 2.11? 3.1 is quite a bit faster 
                           than 3.0.

>Persuasion and Illustrator) and measured the performance of "real world
>functions" (such as opening a file, scrolling, running a macro, performing
>calculations, etc.).


What else was in those machines? They probably put Trident cards in the 
clones and used (slow) IBM VGA in the PS/2s.



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
From: dave@racer.lkg.dec.com (Dave Lyons)
Subject: Re: endian, what is it?
Reply-To: dave@racer.lkg.dec.com
Organization: TNSG - MCC Frameworks Technical Support
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 21:49:04 GMT


In article <C039uG.9y1@vcd.hp.com>, johne@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (John Eaton) writes:
|>It seemed to be an apt description of the Mot/Intel byte order
|>arguments.
|>

The "wars" started long before Motorola and Intel were involved.

--
=============================================================================
Stercorem pro cerebro habes.   <or>  Caput tuum in ano est.

Dave Lyons
Digital Equipment Corporation
550 King Street
Mail Stop LKG1-2/W10
Littleton, MA 01460-1289
dave@racer.ENET.dec.com  (or)  RACER::DAVE
Xref: sparky comp.sys.intel:2850 comp.unix.sys5.r4:1061 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:931
From: jack@admin.mport.COM (Jack Craig)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: ADAPATEC 1542B, TWO SCSI DISKS AND DELL UNIX
Date: 30 Dec 92 19:20:38 GMT
Followup-To: comp.sys.intel
Organization: Microport Inc., Scotts Valley, CA 95066 US of A

bernard@cpio1.fr.mugnet.org (Bernard Fouche) writes:


>I still have a strange problem with a Dell 450/SE : I have an adaptec
>1542B and two SCSI disks. While I had only one disk, I encountered no
>problem. But since I installed a new disk, I see these messages on the
>console :

>WARNING: SCSI: HA 0 - Incoming message not found

you can relax! it is irritating, but not dangerous. you are running
the svr4 3.1 release from usl(via dell). the folks at usl left
in this apparently debug statement that was not in the 2.1 release
and not in the 4.1 release.

it is caused during the interrupt handler, what happens is the interrupt
handler goes into a loop to satisfy/process all currently done
jobs. during the process of interrupt 1, interrrupt 2 is generated
and the job queue is updated with a job done. while still in the 
loop for interrupt 1 it completes the job associated with job2.
it exits and reenters to process for interrupt 2, but that job
is already handled! ergo your annoying message.

if you really hate it, either an upgrade will remove it
or if you're up to the challenge, you can patch out the
cmn_err() call under scsiintr in /etc/conf/pack.d/scsi/Driver.o
careful, there are several...

ok? 

jack...
=============================================================================
 Jack Craig  Microport         SVR4 408-438-UNIX   uunet!mport.com!jack
             Software Horizons SVR3 408-684-1375   uunet!sco.com!blznrzn!jack
=============================================================================
Xref: sparky comp.sys.intel:2810 comp.realtime:1470 eunet.misc:655 comp.misc:4674
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Intel's new performance test iCOMP
Date: 22 Dec 92 16:43:33 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <1992Dec19.031237.4870@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, gonzaled@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (LGV/MC) writes:

| From PC Magazine, December 8, 1992:
| "The current iCOMP index is made up of four weighted components: 16-bit
| integer (67 percent), 16-bit floating point (3 percent), 32-bit integer
| (25 percent), and 32-bit floating point (5 percent).  

  My Intel manual doesn't even indicate that 16 bit FP exists, just 32,
64 and 80 bit IEEE temp format. Since all the processors are 32 bit
internal, I'm not sure what any of this means, or why they completely
ignored double precision (64 bit) fp.

  I tend to ignore any benchmark without source, this one particularly.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    Keyboard controller has been disabled, press F1 to continue.
From: YOUNG@tattoo.cs.widener.edu (Rob Young)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Aplha vs. Pentium
Date: 31 Dec 1992 20:06:17 GMT
Organization: Widener News/Mail Gateway
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: tattoo.cs.widener.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

In <00965E8C.5E07CBC0@vms.csd.mu.edu> 2760carpente@vms.csd.mu.edu writes:

> This question has been bugging me for a while and so I finally decided to post
> it.  The new chip from DEC (Alhpa) is going to run Windows NT along with VMS
> and UNIX.  If a 'Alpha' PC is running Windows NT, will this PC be faster than a
> 'Pentium' PC running Windows.  I mean, are these CPU's comparable...?  I am
> assuming that the Alpha PC will be better and faster... Any comments..
> Benchmarks..  
> Have a great new year everyone..
> __    ___ __   ___   __    
>   \     /   |     \    | Vinny Carpenter            | It takes a big man to 
>    \   /    |      \   | Marquette University       | cry.  It takes an even
>       /     |    |  \  | 2760carpente@vms.csd.mu.edu| bigger man to laugh at
>      /      |    |     | vcarpent@nyx.cs.du.edu     | that man -Jack Handey
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Looking at pg. 59, Digital News & Review from November 23, 1992:

	"Our Alpha systems are going to match the price point of the Pentium
	systems on a head-to-head basis," promises Bill Storey, DEC's program
	Manager for Windows NT. 

			...

	"In order to take full advantage of the superscalar elements of the 
	Intel chip, developers will have to recompile their existing Windows
	applications, contends Jesse Lipcon, DEC's entry-level systems group
	vice-president.  "At that point, we'll say they should port to 
	Alpha AXP because we'll offer two to three times the performance,"
	he [Lipcon] says.

2x performance at the same price point.  If the emulation is decent, Alpha
PC's might make a small dent in the x86 market share.  If you are a developer,
why not Alpha?  (Assuming your favorite tools can port, etc....).  Minimal
flamage please, thanks.

				Rob


                                                     young@tattoo.cs.widener.edu
"Drawn like moths we drift into the city, the timeless old attraction. Cruising 
  for the action.  Lit up like a firefly, just to feel the living night."
       -- Neil Peart
From: tmh@doppel.first.gmd.de (Thomas Hoberg)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Aplha vs. Pentium
Date: 2 Jan 93 00:49:58 GMT
Organization: GMD-FIRST, Berlin
In-reply-to: 2760carpente@vms.csd.mu.edu's message of 31 Dec 92 18:02:16 GMT

In article <00965E8C.5E07CBC0@vms.csd.mu.edu> 2760carpente@vms.csd.mu.edu (METALLICA) writes:
   This question has been bugging me for a while and so I finally decided to post
   it.  The new chip from DEC (Alhpa) is going to run Windows NT along with VMS
   and UNIX.  If a 'Alpha' PC is running Windows NT, will this PC be faster than a
   'Pentium' PC running Windows.  I mean, are these CPU's comparable...?  I am
   assuming that the Alpha PC will be better and faster... Any comments..
   Benchmarks..  

Don't know if the Alpha is for real yet (haven't seen an Alpha PC on
display at the PC dealer around the corner, but then I didn't see a
Pentium either) so no benchmarks, just a bit more speculation:

Let's assume an Alpha runs a typical compiled C program three times
faster. It's then going to be a lot slower emulating a x86 CPU than
an equivalent x86 CPU, the difference is more likely 1:10 than 1:3.
Windows applications spent a lot of their CPU cycles outside the
application context inside the Windows runtime environment (GDI etc.).
On an Alpha port of NT that is going to be Alpha code (= native, no
emulation). Whether the application as a whole is faster on an Alpha
or on a Pentium machine then depends on the application. It's like a
386sx with a good graphics accellerator vs. a 486 with a dumb SVGA
card: Some applications will feel faster on one, some on the other.

If Microsoft does things right, Alpha vs. x86 should be of no
importance to you as a developer. A recompile should be sufficient to
port an application.

As to DEC competing with Pentium in prices: I believe that when I see
Alpha motherboards sold around the corner for under $1000.
---
Thomas M. Hoberg   | Internet: tmh@first.gmd.de
1000 Berlin 41     |           tmh@cs.tu-berlin.de
Wielandstr. 4      |
Germany            | BITNET:   tmh@tub.bitnet 
+49-30-851-50-21   |

Xref: sparky comp.sys.intel:2821 comp.sys.mac.hardware:24806 comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware:34046
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: 486 vs. Mac Benchmarks
Date: 23 Dec 92 14:45:35 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY


  The truth is that Mac applications are 32 bit, and DOS applications
are 16 bit. A comparison of UNIX 32 bit applications would be more
correct, if they were just comparing the processors.

  Truth doesn't sell magazines.

-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    Keyboard controller has been disabled, press F1 to continue.