Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utcsrgv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!mendell
From: mendell@utcsrgv.UUCP (Mark Mendell)
Newsgroups: net.micro,net.research,net.cse
Subject: Re: First Summary of PC's in Education Survey
Message-ID: <3467@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 7-Mar-84 09:17:16 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsrgv.3467
Posted: Wed Mar  7 09:17:16 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 7-Mar-84 09:53:34 EST
References: <3604@utzoo.UUCP> <3466@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Organization: CSRG, University of Toronto
Lines: 16

Sorry Steve, but as a person working on an 8086/80186 compiler, I take offense
to your statement :
>>    - The 80186 is arguably as good as a 68000 and anyone with talent
>>      can create software to run on the 80186 and 8088 and all the other
>>      family members
    A 68000 may not be the best architecture around (I would prefer a NS16032
myself), but I would take an awful lot of convincing before I would agree that
an 80186 beats the advantages of 32-bit arithmetic and linear address space on
the 68000.  While I agree that software can be developed that will run on both
machines, I think I would prefer a Turing Machine over the 80186.
-- 
Mark Mendell
	    Computer Systems Research Group    University of Toronto
	    Usenet:	{linus, ihnp4, allegra, decvax, floyd}!utcsrgv!perelgut
	    CSNET:	mendell@Toronto
	    ARPA:	mendell%Toronto@CSNet-Relay