From: jerry@msi.com (Jerry Shekhel)
Subject: Re: CBM mention on 12/11/92 Computer Chronicles
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:04:29 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
X-Posted-From: hemi.msi.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

Andy Finkel (andy@cbmvax.commodore.com) wrote:
:
: Since I actually know what I'm talking about, its easy to see
: how you managed to get the impression that I'm Mr. Information.
:

Ha!  The only impression I got is that you're TRYING TO ACT like Mr.
Information, but your bias clouds your vision and your desire to know
the real facts.

:
: You know, you make a lot of bigoted statements:  
:
: >I had a feeling you were just as insulting as the rest of the Amigoids,
: >Andy.  Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
:
: >Unfortunately, it seems to be the only thing that the typical Amigoid
: >understands.  I thought you'd be different; I was wrong.
:
: You seem to put people in groups, and judge them on the basis of their
: group membership, as your statements (two recent ones above).   This is 
: not a good tendency to have.
:

Really?  And what about all the Amigoids calling the PC users "sheep",
"lemmings", "clowns", etc.?  That's not bigoted or insulting?  Just reading
this newsgroup is enough to drive any self-respecting non-Amiga user up the
wall.  I freely admit that sometimes it's a bit too much and I tend to fire
back.  That's when the self-righteous Amigoids like yourself crawl out of the
woodwork and try to give me an ethical slap on the wrist.  Please spare me.
If you really were Mr. Information, you'd put every PC-bashing falsehood-
posting know-nothing flame-throwing Amigoid through the same routine, but
somehow, I doubt it -- your bias is just too strong.

:
: >Wrong.  I don't want to back up the claims that you ACCUSE me of making,
: >but I'll gladly back up my own claims.
:
: Well, for instance, in the portion of the article you edited out, you said 
: OS/2 cannot talk to the hardware directly.  I posted how OS/2 can talk to
: the hardware.  I invited you to back up your claim.  Strange, no comment ?
:

I'm sick of it, that's all.  I told you time and time again, that I was
talking about processes accessing devices by issuing port I/O instructions,
not making calls to the OS.  You keep bringing up the direct disk volume
access trick, which was deliberately put in to support fancy hard disk
utilities.

:  
: [Excerpt from DOS emulator discussion removed]
:
: Now, granted it has a lot more technical detail than your usual post.
:

Gee, thanks.

:
: But
: was the detail correct, or misleading ?  You  mentioned correctly that there 
: are always segments.  However, as for the rest of your statements ?
: Are you going to respond to Mr. van Elst by citing a reference showing
: your statement was correct and that his was incorrect ?
:

Why?  Mr. van Elst and I don't really disagree!  He just pointed out that
the segment descriptor structure can be cached when the corresponding segment
register is loaded, and that all the information in the descriptor can be
held around for fast access.  This is perfectly valid!  In fact, that's
what the x86 hardware does, in order to avoid having to make several memory
accesses for each one.  However, a software emulator still has to keep
this info in memory, unless it's coded in tight assembly language AND running
on a CPU with LOTS of unused registers lying around.  The 680x0 is not such
a CPU.  The result is inescapable: emulating a single x86 protected-mode
instruction requires MANY MORE actual memory accesses than does emulating
a real-mode instruction (this is limited to instructions with memory operands,
of course).  Since RAM is slow relative to register, cache, and CPU speeds
in general, emulating protected mode is much slower than emulating real mode.
That's all I was trying to say, and if you want further proof, just look at
the recommended system configuration for this new protected-mode SoftPC
version.

:
: Windows can also be evaluated by looking at the layering Windows, by 
: looking at what is being hidden by the OS and what is not,
: by disassembling Windows (beta versions of Windows came with
: complete cv symbol tables), and so on.
:

I agree, but there aren't any absolutes when it comes to this stuff.  To
this day there are many people who think that Windows is very well
designed, and I happen to be one of them.  I realize perfectly well that
there are others who disagree.

:
: FYI, the Windows SDK does contain source for two parts of the
: USER module (DefWindowProc() and DefDlgProc() , the first of which
: is a single function over 500 lines long.  The DDK comes with
: source for a number of the drivers that come with Windows)
:

I haven't seen the MS SDK (I use the Borland package), but I can believe
the DefxxxProc() stuff.  They aren't exactly run-of-the-mill functions,
though.  Besides, shouldn's code aesthetic sometimes be sacrificed in favor
of speed or efficiency?  One question -- do these functions each consist
of a single long "switch" statement?  If so, I'll be happy to admit that it's
not a good way of doing it.

:
: Again, you see things through that chip on your shoulder.  Since I
: like what's happening with the OS/2 32 bit API  (and, what's more
: important know and understand what's happening with the 32 bit API)
: I just can't accept that statement.  Since I actually do MSDOS programming
: for palmtops, I just can't accept that statement.  Since I do Unix
: programming, I just can't accept that statement.  Since I do Windows
: programming, I just can't accept that statement.
:

I disagree with some of YOUR statements for the same reasons.  If you
can't tolerate that, the intolerance is YOUR problem (as well as being
a major problem all over the world).  If you're going to bash me, at least
take the time to make sure I said what you think I said.  If you're going
to bash me blindly, be prepared to duck.  That's all.

:
: If you really believed that, you'd post the technical details anyway,
: since it would let the rest of the net know that you actually know
: what you're talking about.
:

I used to care about what this net thought, before I found out that most
of the time, it doesn't think at all.

:
: andy
:
--
+-------------------+----------------------------+---------------------------+
| JERRY J. SHEKHEL  | Molecular Simulations Inc. | Time just fades the pages |
| Drummers do it... |     Burlington, MA USA     | in my book of memories.   |
|    ... In rhythm! |        jerry@msi.com       |         -- Guns N' Roses  |
+-------------------+----------------------------+---------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy