//flex table opened by JP

Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : Is this true?


Win_98
08-20-2000, 11:45 PM
It might sound funny to a lot of you when we are writing 'poor Intel is hurting'. While I don't agree with my editor Van Smith that the Titan Intel will actually fall anytime soon, I do agree that Intel is having its hardest time since IBM made the incomprehensible decision to equip their 'PC' with Intel's badly engineered 8088 processor instead of Motorola's far superior 68k solution many many years ago. The 'older' ones of you might still remember that IBM's PC was the one and only reason why two IT companies with rather mediocre products finally became more important than good old IBM itself. If you wonder why we all have to put up with Intel's as well as Microsoft's unpleasant business practices then please go ahead and blame IBM. I guess that IBM's decision makers from that time have often wished there was a time machine, which could straighten out all their mistakes from the past.

---------------------------------------------
this is a quote from tomshardware when he was disappointed of the intel 1.13 gigahertz that was unstable and just away to try to get ahead. ha! intel caught red handed. LOL I did not know this but sound interesting to me and I agree it was mistake from the beginning when an 8088 processor from Intel was used instead of the 68K processor which I thought wasn't possible. It did evolved too but only halfway say 68060 and that was the last of it hmm unfortunately used in a dieing computer called the Amiga it just die along http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/frown.gif it was used in the arcade too running at 7mhz or 14mhz... was used in the neo-geo too from SNK, amazing capabilities right? well anyway it certainly is alot more advanced then 8088 processor as they say. a 68000 processor say 14mhz can still do a hell of alot because the architecture is just amazing. used in the arcade and you see it can do thing simataneously while with a 8088 proessor you will see a horrible drop in performance when used in arcade instead because it was a very buggy design and still is today... your pc crashing often maybe the result of both win98 and the cpu that is made today. remember the time slice used in win3.11? well it still there today except it hidden in win9x and winNt as well.
there is foreground timeslice, background time slice and another timeslice to switch between the two. with a 68K processor the hardware does all this! with very little or no loss in performance when doing 2 or more thing at the same time. had no ideas that Intel from the beginning had made such crappy CPU design called 8088 and quickly took over the CPU market as well and microsoft ran everyone off at the same time.

OuTpaTienT
08-20-2000, 11:54 PM
So basically what you're saying is the x86 platform isn't capable of "true" multi-tasking. I thought everyone already knew that?

Win_98
08-21-2000, 08:51 PM
unfortunately most folk dont give a **** where it is true multi-tasking or not as long as it windows based. average joe have no clue what multi-tasking is either. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/frown.gif http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/frown.gif software driven window9x is a slow operating system compared to DOS. I think it because DOS is a single task operating system where the CPU was designed to do in the first place. it is still much faster to run dos game in windows then running windows game that uses directX because of way windows work.. slow that is. it maybe the fault of cpu not having true multi tasking or the software is not written well enought... or maybe both.

[This message has been edited by Win_98 (edited 08-21-2000).]

Dputiger
08-22-2000, 12:11 AM
Win_98, speaking as someone who worked in DOS for many, many years, I'll tell you, there's no way in HELL I'd trade Windows, imperfect as it is, for going back to DOS.

Here's a fun series of events:

1) Buy a new game

2) Discover not enough 'conventional' memory is free. Spend an hour tweaking himem.sys and Emm386 to get optimal performance.

3) Discover game wants 'Expanded' not 'Extended' memory. Frantically page through DOS manual looking for information on how to reconfigure RAM and what the difference is.

4) Soundblaster fails to initialize. Spend an hour peering through the case checking all the manual IRQ and DMA settings.

5) After several hours of frustration, finally get down to playing.

OuTpaTienT
08-22-2000, 02:10 AM
Maybe that's what he is saying. Sometimes getting the game to run was more fun than the actual game.

KAknight
08-22-2000, 09:42 AM
what kind of crappy games was he playin???
:P

howste
08-22-2000, 07:13 PM
Maybe he was playing Geekgrl's Cheerios game?

grunt
08-22-2000, 08:22 PM
I was playing with WinMe the other night. I was impressed. I got the resources down to about 4% then started and played UT with almost no drag. I got the resources so low by highlighting everything in Control Panel and hitting enter, then highlighting all the fonts, right click, properties. It's enough to crash just about any 95/98 machine but ME took it like a champ.

mong_2
08-22-2000, 09:41 PM
i remember playing games in dos on my dads 486. And yes your rite diputiger i do remember trying to get himem.sys working right and ill tell you this free. Stuff doing that ever again. And if it was fun for anybody to pay $100 for a game and spend 2 or 3 days trying to get the dam thing working then you must be mad.
Praise window 9x with all of its bugs and faults id never go back.
And for those of you that cant stop bagging windows then go and use dos, or some other operating system. Mine never ever crashes even when i clock my cpu. I have no problems whatsoever. Maybe you should remember that all those crashes you say you get could well be the Mboard. Whats more i even have one of the dog mother boards that every one is bagging intel 820 chip set with the MTH, well i dont get any problems with that either, and i thrash my machine i clock it i open the dam thing up every week to see what else i can do to it and its fine.
eeeey yyeei yeei

OuTpaTienT
08-22-2000, 10:09 PM
I look back fondly on those days. Seriously, that was how I've learned most of what I know about computers. If it's broke, you gotta fix it. If you don't know how to fix it, then you gotta learn how to fix it. Sometimes frustrating, but I always felt better knowing that I fixed it and in the process learned some new aspect of this crazy machine.

Heck, if every game and piece of software I loaded on my computer ran flawlessly I think it'd be safe to say I would know NOTHING about computers right now. (Some might say that anyways.)

http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/wink.gifuT