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