jpm@bnl44.UUCP (John McNamee) (06/18/85)
This has been talked about in net.micro.68k (and about 5 other groups where the discussion never really belonged in the first place), but I haven't seen anything in net.news.group. A new group is really needed to contain the debates over the merits and flaws of various microcomputer CPUs. It seems to be human (well, at least programmer) nature to argue over which chip is best, and having the various vendors on the net only makes it worse. These debates are not going to go away, so I think it is time to create an appropriate home for them. Before anybody claims that the debates are totally worthless, let me point out that they are interesting and useful to some people (myself included). While they do contain a lot of worthless flames, some really good information is also posted (the kind of information that can only come from actually working with a chip, something not everybody gets the chance to do in the case of new chips). -- John McNamee ..!decvax!philabs!sbcs!bnl44!jpm jpm@BNL44.ARPA "MS-DOS is a communist plot"
rick@uwmacc.UUCP (the absurdist) (06/19/85)
[ This bug is a lot faster than your bug, nyah, nyah ]
Ditto! Net.micro.bench would be a TERRIFIC way of improving
the micro groups. As it stands, cross-postings to
net.micro[pc,68k, mac] and net.arch are all too common.
Even if the original posting really did justify the scatter
gun approach (rare...), the followups don't.
Putting all this in its own group would let those of us
who USE micros concentrate on how to exploit what we have, while
giving room for those who want to talk about chip design.
I'd like to add a suggestion that net.micro.bench also be
described as the appropriate place to start discussions of
compiler benchmarks. These discussions have the same scattergun
problem that the chip speed discussions do, with the bonus that
they slop over into the net.lang discussions and end up in
religous flames about C vs. Ada vs. Pascal....
Start a new group ... and make my working day easier.
--
"I get PAID to read all this net.micro stuff"
Rick Keir -- MicroComputer Information Center, MACC
1210 West Dayton St/U Wisconsin Madison/Mad WI 53706
{allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!rickspaf@gatech.CSNET (Gene Spafford) (06/20/85)
In article <963@bnl44.UUCP> jpm@bnl44.UUCP (John McNamee) writes: >This has been talked about in net.micro.68k (and about 5 other groups where >the discussion never really belonged in the first place), but I haven't seen >anything in net.news.group. A new group is really needed to contain the >debates over the merits and flaws of various microcomputer CPUs. Why can't "net.arch" or "net.micro" be used for this? Those groups would seem to be appropriate to what you are discussing.... -- Gene "3 months and holding" Spafford The Clouds Project, School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332 CSNet: Spaf @ GATech ARPA: Spaf%GATech.CSNet @ CSNet-Relay.ARPA uucp: ...!{akgua,allegra,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!spaf
greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) (06/21/85)
I vote 'yes' for net.micro.bench. My reason:
I never got around to reading anything about the 68K before, and didn't really
know how it compared to the 8xx8?. Now I have a better idea. Although
there is net.arch, discussions there are generally not of interest to the
"general" usenet public, whereas true comparisons between different chips
would be.
BTW, I found the benchwars fascinating --- lets have some more in the
right newsgroup: net.micro.bench!
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ross M. Greenberg @ Time Inc, New York
--------->{ihnp4 | vax135}!timeinc!greenber<---------
I highly doubt that Time Inc. they would make me their spokesperson.chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach) (06/22/85)
In article <337@gatech.CSNET> spaf@gatech.UUCP (Gene Spafford) writes: >>This has been talked about in net.micro.68k (and about 5 other groups where >>the discussion never really belonged in the first place), but I haven't seen >>anything in net.news.group. A new group is really needed to contain the >>debates over the merits and flaws of various microcomputer CPUs. > >Why can't "net.arch" or "net.micro" be used for this? Those groups >would seem to be appropriate to what you are discussing.... net.arch tends towards future thinking and theoretical discussions rather than everyday comparisons between existing machines. Net.micro is gatewayed to the ARPA, and already has more than enough volume. Rather than a flame oriented group, I think it probably IS time to have a place to compare benchmarks, especially now that there are benchmarking systems (Aim, and Byte, for example) that are becoming accepted as standards. I'd like to see net.micro.bench, or some such, if we can figure out how to keep people from crossposting anyway... -- :From the misfiring synapses of: Chuq Von Rospach {cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA The offices were very nice, and the clients were only raping the land, and then, of course, there was the money...
rick@uwmacc.UUCP (the absurdist) (06/27/85)
In article <337@gatech.CSNET> spaf@gatech.UUCP (Gene Spafford) writes: >> A new group is really needed to contain the >>debates over the merits and flaws of various microcomputer CPUs. > >Why can't "net.arch" or "net.micro" be used for this? Those groups >would seem to be appropriate to what you are discussing.... "contain the debates" is perhaps ambiguous --- what a number of people would like to do is to MOVE the debates from their current setting. It is ambiguous (now) as to where these messages go, since they could be plausibly in net.micro and net.arch both; then you can add in any micro subgroup that might also be referenced, like .pc and .mac and .68k if its an 8088 vs. 68000 debate; then cross-referencing .atari because of Tramiel's new machine.... The hope is that the net.micro and net.arch discussions will be easier to keep up on for those of us who aren't interested in benchmarking. -- "Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain." Rick Keir -- MicroComputer Information Center, MACC 1210 West Dayton St/U Wisconsin Madison/Mad WI 53706 {allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!rick