SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (02/19/90)
On Sun, 18 Feb 90 18:49:00 GMT you said: >> Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.apple: 18-Feb-90 Re: MicroEMACS / UNIX >> editors Chan Wilson@NISC.SRI.COM (1109) > >> Hmph. After I spent an afternoon playing with X windows on a Mac IIx, I >> wouldn't _want_ to see X windows on a GS. A IIx is running at 16mhz, >> and it >> still was pretty slow. Maybe on the IIxi (whoops, not out yet :^) >> running at >> 33 (or is it 40) mhz, or maybe even a 20mhz 65816 GS, but not at 2.8mhz. > > What do you mean abou the IIci? It's been out for a few months now. He didn't write 'CI' he wrote 'XI' which is (allegedly) scheduled for release next month (my Vaporware column -- coming next weekend -- has a bit on it). Last I heard the 'XI' (or was it 'CXI' -- Apple's getting so many flavors of Mac II's that it's VERY confusing) was going to be a 25 MHz (a 'CI' with more slots). Lessee, isn't it the Mac tower (the Mac IIt <-- that's 'T') that's going to be 33 MHz (Aug '90??)? Why not just buy one of the third party 50 MHz 68030 accelerators and have done with it :-) On the other hand, after seeing the bench mark specs on the 25 MHz 68040 <-- that's 40 (13 Megaflops!!) maybe I'll wait until Fall (August???) for the last of Apple's 680xx Macs... >running X. It's slow as sin on an IBM RT, and they'll blow away a Out of date (the RT's was obsolete when introduced four years ago :-) IBM announced the 'new RT' (System 6000) last week. It's an order of magnitude faster than the old RT (the low end 6000 is 20 MIPS) so its GUI isn't as "gooey" as before ;-) /s Murph <Sewall%UConnVM.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.Edu> [Internet] or ...{psuvax1 or mcvax}!uconnvm.bitnet!sewall [UUCP] + Standard disclaimer applies ("The opinions expressed are my own" etc.)
cyliao@eng.umd.edu (Chun-Yao Liao) (02/21/90)
In article <9002182102.AA00112@apple.com> SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) writes: > >Why not just buy one of the third party 50 MHz 68030 accelerators and >have done with it :-) On the other hand, after seeing the bench mark >specs on the 25 MHz 68040 <-- that's 40 (13 Megaflops!!) maybe I'll >wait until Fall (August???) for the last of Apple's 680xx Macs... > >/s Murph <Sewall%UConnVM.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.Edu> [Internet] > or ...{psuvax1 or mcvax}!uconnvm.bitnet!sewall [UUCP] > + Standard disclaimer applies ("The opinions expressed are my own" etc.) Uh... sorry about this, but the company claimed performance of 68040 at 25 MHz is 20 MIPS, 3.5 MFLOPs, and 1.3 cycle per instruction in average. Where did you get all those numbers? (I mean the 40 and 13) -- |I want Rocket Chip 10 MHz, Z-Ram Ultra II, UniDisk 3.5 | cyliao@wam.umd.edu | |I want my own NeXT, 50MHz 68040, 64Mb RAM, 660Mb SCSI, | Chun Yao Liao | | NeXT laser printer, net connection. | Accepting Donations!| /* If (my_.signature =~ yours) coincidence = true; else ignore_this = true; */