Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!texbell!vector!attctc!jolnet!gaggy From: gaggy@jolnet.ORPK.IL.US (Gregory Gulik) Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards Subject: Re: What differentiates a Workstation from a PC (Re: What should GNU run on (was Re: what kinds of things . . .)) Message-ID: <1324@jolnet.ORPK.IL.US> Date: 15 Aug 89 19:20:47 GMT References: <20519@adm.BRL.MIL> <36370@bu-cs.BU.EDU> <5665@ficc.uu.net> <1510@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> <1528@convex.UUCP> Reply-To: gaggy@jolnet.UUCP (Gregory Gulik) Organization: Jolnet, Public Access Unix, Orland Park (Joliet), Ill. Lines: 39 In article <1528@convex.UUCP> datri@convex.com writes: >== THe only thing that differentiates a "PC" from a "workstation", so far as >== I can tell, is... >=that a PC still holds on to philosophies expressed in an 8-bit age while >=living in a 32-bit (64?) age, against the "eagerness" with which >=a workstation is equipped to make use of the newest technologies. > >Personally, I find it difficult to call something running MS-DOS with >a fairly low-res screen a workstation. Ok, get ready for Gaggy's definition of workstation: Workstation: A computer who's manufacturer is afraid of being sued by IBM for calling it a Personal Computer. 1/2 * 8^) Think about it, computer companies are having field day suing each other because "their product is too similar to our product, nyah, nyah". Therefor, someone had to make up a new name.. Ok, speaking of comparing 386's to a Sun 2/160. Just today I was comparing the load handling abilities of both. Guess what. I found that the Sun (who's dhrystone rating is 1/5th of the 386's) was able to handle a load almost as well as that "hot" 386... Face it, the 386 isn't the greatest when trying to do more than 1 thing at a time. -greg -- Gregory Gulik Phone: (312) 825-2435 E-Mail: ...!jolnet!gaggy || ...!chinet!gag || gulik@depaul.edu || gulik@iwlcs.att.com || variations thereof.