bjorn@dataio.UUCP (Bjorn Benson) (06/03/85)
Enough is enough!!! I propose that we start a new newsgroup "net.micro.68vs286" so that all you people who enjoy discussing benchmarks, registers, segments, clock cycles and other marketing hype can do so away from the rest of us. I am member of the user community, not the argueing community. Bjorn Benson ..!uw-beaver!entropy!dataio!bjorn
bill@persci.UUCP (06/04/85)
>Enough is enough!!! > >I propose that we start a new newsgroup "net.micro.68vs286" so that >all you people who enjoy discussing benchmarks, registers, segments, >clock cycles and other marketing hype can do so away from the rest of >us. I am member of the user community, not the argueing community. > > Bjorn Benson > ..!uw-beaver!entropy!dataio!bjorn I second the motion!! I am just about ready to unsubscribe from this group. (Perhaps it should be called net.flame.micro :-) -- Bill Swan {ihnp4,decvax,allegra,...}!uw-beaver!tikal!persci!bill
srm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian) (06/07/85)
In article <675@dataio.UUCP> bjorn@dataio.UUCP (Bjorn Benson) writes: > >I propose that we start a new newsgroup "net.micro.68vs286" so that >all you people who enjoy discussing benchmarks, registers, segments, >clock cycles and other marketing hype can do so away from the rest of >us. I second the motion--only let's call it net.micro.compet. I think that there is a legitimate place on the net for discussion of the pros and cons of various architectures/implementations, and I think that the people who just want solid technical info about their specific micro/language ought to be able to read the appropriate newsgroup without having to wade through the competitive material. -- Richard Mateosian {cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!srm nsc!srm@decwrl.ARPA
nather@utastro.UUCP (Ed Nather) (06/07/85)
> In article <675@dataio.UUCP> bjorn@dataio.UUCP (Bjorn Benson) writes: > > > >I propose that we start a new newsgroup "net.micro.68vs286" so that > >all you people who enjoy discussing benchmarks, registers, segments, > >clock cycles and other marketing hype can do so away from the rest of > >us. > > I second the motion--only let's call it net.micro.compet. I think that > there is a legitimate place on the net for discussion of the pros and cons > of various architectures/implementations, and I think that the people who > just want solid technical info about their specific micro/language ought > to be able to read the appropriate newsgroup without having to wade through > the competitive material. > -- > Richard Mateosian I thought that's what net.arch was for in the first place. It's why I read it. There is no better way to learn details of the "uglies" in a particular architecture, and their consequences, than to read a debate by two competitors. I say, let the flames roll on ... -- Ed Nather Astronony Dept, U of Texas @ Austin {allegra,ihnp4}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather nather%utastro.UTEXAS@ut-sally.ARPA
clif@intelca.UUCP (Clif Purkiser) (06/07/85)
> Enough is enough!!! > > I propose that we start a new newsgroup "net.micro.68vs286" so that > all you people who enjoy discussing benchmarks, registers, segments, > clock cycles and other marketing hype can do so away from the rest of > us. I am member of the user community, not the argueing community. > > Bjorn Benson > ..!uw-beaver!entropy!dataio!bjorn I think Bjorn is correct in fairness to all of the people who don't care how fast or slow (in the case of the 680xx or 320xx) a manufacturer's processor is. I think we shouldn't limit it just to the 80286 vs the 68020, so why not call it net.micro.benchmarks. -- Clif Purkiser, Intel, Santa Clara, Ca. HIGH PERFORMANCE MICROPROCESSORS {pur-ee,hplabs,amd,scgvaxd,dual,idi,omsvax}!intelca!clif {standard disclaimer about how these views are mine and may not reflect the views of Intel, my boss , or USNET goes here. }
jty@tut.UUCP (Jyrki Yli-Nokari) (06/10/85)
In article <persci.182> bill@persci.UUCP writes: >>Enough is enough!!! >> Sure is!! >>I propose that we start a new newsgroup "net.micro.68vs286" so that.. >I second the motion!! I am just about ready to unsubscribe from this group. 3 votes from jty jv and hmj@tut.UUCP >(Perhaps it should be called net.flame.micro :-) Yes! Or move the whole discussion to net.flame. It really belongs there! -- FORTH makes my days! ...mcvax!tut!jty Jyrki Yli-Nokari N 61 26' E 23 50' +358 31 162590, home +358 31 178833
brooks@lll-crg.ARPA (Eugene D. Brooks III) (06/12/85)
Is there a way to have vnews skip items such as the N'th iteration on something as the 286 vs 68k battle? I can't take it any more! My line is only 1200 baud and n just doesn't work that fast. Help in this matter would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Eugene
dibble@rochester.UUCP (06/12/85)
> Or move the whole discussion to net.flame. It really belongs there!
I find the discussion at least a little informative. True, there is more
noise than light but even the noise is sort of fun. The participants in
the discussion are polite and present organized (if biased) arguments.
In this discussion I've seen the first information I've encountered about
the 80386.
I like seeing people who seem to know discuss the rational behind the design
for the 8086.
If this information about microprocessors and computer architecture was
mixed with the junk on net.flame, I'd never see it.
These notes are clearly marked by the subject line. When I get bored of this
discussion I'll stop reading them.
Finally if the discussion of the merits of microprocessors is moved to
a separate news group the lack of this critical audience would probably
either make the contestants shut up or sink to simple name calling.
I say: keep them here where we can keep an eye on them.bjorn@dataio.UUCP (Bjorn Benson) (06/12/85)
In article <127@peregrine.UUCP> mike@peregrine.UUCP (Mike Wexler) writes: >> >> In article <675@dataio.UUCP> bjorn@dataio.UUCP (Bjorn Benson) writes: >> >Enough is enough!!! >> > >> >I propose that we start a new newsgroup "net.micro.68vs286" ... >> >> I vote YES. > >How about creating a moderated group? As the originator of this I would like to point out that a moderated newsgroup would not work for this "hot" topic. The moderator would prevent people from posting flames, insults, biased benchmarks, advertisements, etc. However these people would just post them elsewhere instead (like here!). In other words a moderator net.micro.68vs286 (or whatever) would not serve the purpose of cleaning up these newsgroups. Bjorn Benson ..!uw-beaver!entropy!dataio!bjorn P.S. And if you chose a moderator would he have an 80*86 or 68k system? :-)
bc@cyb-eng.UUCP (Bill Crews) (06/14/85)
If there has ever been a topic as totally burned out, dead, and deserving of being dropped, THIS IS IT! Please have mercy upon your follow net readers; keep your opinions on this subject. -- / \ Bill Crews ( bc ) Cyb Systems, Inc \__/ Austin, Texas [ gatech | ihnp4 | nbires | seismo | ucb-vax ] ! ut-sally ! cyb-eng ! bc
bc@cyb-eng.UUCP (Bill Crews) (06/15/85)
> I say: keep them here where we can keep an eye on them.
But what on Earth does this have to do with net.lang.c, from which I am now
responding? net.micro and net.arch, yes, maybe; but please spare the rest
of us.
--
/ \ Bill Crews
( bc ) Cyb Systems, Inc
\__/ Austin, Texas
[ gatech | ihnp4 | nbires | seismo | ucb-vax ] ! ut-sally ! cyb-eng ! bcpaulsc@tekecs.UUCP (Paul Scherf) (06/17/85)
I think I'd rather see the (heated) articles about 286 vs. 68k, than all the articles about whether to start a new group for it. Isn't there a group (net.news.group?) for discussing new group creation? If all the people who are complaining about the 286 vs. 68k articles spent that effort learning about awk, each one of them by now could have their very own program for preprocessing the news and marking as read all articles with a '6' and a '8' in either order. Paul Scherf, Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon, USA, paulsc@radio_flyer.TEK.UUCP