906d73a4
From: et472@ncf.ca
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, N Morrison wrote:
> On Jul 12, 8:39 pm, Michael Black wrote:
>
>> Besides, now that computers are so much larger in capability, there isn't
>> that much a difference between 8k of RAM and 64K, it's only an 8:1 leap.
>> 64Megs is now small, and that's an 8000:1 leap over the CoCo's 64K; this
>> computer has 8 times that 64megs.
>>
>> Michael
>
> But thanks to Vista your 3 GHz computer with a Gb or two of ram and a
> Tb of HD can still run slower than an MC-10!
>
>
I've never run Microsoft as an operating system. My prime use of
Microsoft products was when their BASIC was embedded in just about
any computer you could buy. I admit to using MS-Word on a Mac Plus
when I was running that for eight years in the nineties, but I've never
run WIndows.
I first tried C under OS-9 on the Color Computer. It took so long to
compile just a simple "Hello World" program that I pretty much gave
up on it, and went back to assembly language. THe CPU was too slow,
the floppy drives too slow, and you'd have to go through it all again
every time you made a mistake (which was pretty regular when starting
out at C).
A couple of years ago I needed a really simple program and decided
I'd try C again. What a difference, with a 1GHz computer, the simple
program compiled pretty much instantly, so it was really easy to fix
problems. Reminded me of the brief time I played with BASIC (in ROM),
you'd instantly see the errors. But then, that was a whole lot faster
than the CoCo.
I remember when I modified my OSI Superboard II, that I bought in 1981,
so the CPU would run at 2MHz rather than the standard 1MHz. Was that
ever a snappy improvement, right away I could see things working faster.
Michael
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
