Re: Re(fcc): TI-H: Radio/Infrared/Laser Communications
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Re(fcc): TI-H: Radio/Infrared/Laser Communications
NT sucks. MacOS sucks. BeOS sucks. AmigaOS sucks.
Unix sucks. Less.
Perhaps Jon has to do some work on an NT-based program that won't run
under Wine, and he's not willing to deal with FreeBSD's latest "can't
write floppies" problem, or the sloth that it Solaris. Granted, the
floppy problem has a fix, but I had to vent.
Linux can do all the things that NT can, only better. That's why one
would choose it over NT.
Finally, CISC has to interpret and breakdown variable-size microcode in
order to run, while RISC avoids that step, using fewer instructions of
the same length. As a result, RISC lends itself better to
multi-pipeline CPU designs. Finally, you cannot compare RISC and CISC
based on clock speed, because the programs are compiled based on the CPU
itself. The PIC may use a limited instruction set, but unless it uses
no microcode, it's not RISC. To prove a point, Intel x86 designs have
been moving toward RISC since the 486, further blurring the distinction
between the two camps.
Oh, and you can't compare bogomips across platforms. I saw a Libretto
100CT get a higher bogomips rating than an Alpha 300+ MHz machine. It's
all in the loop optimization.
CK
ns [despuqué] wrote:
>
> Sorry I had to... why do you "have" to stick with NT? And why would you
> choose linux over NT? BTW: as grant was talking about how pics are
> slower, well CISC is 2x faster than RISC!
>
Follow-Ups:
References: