From: Paul Khoury (pkhoury_at_earthlink.net)
Date: Wed Jul 30 1997 - 22:16:49 EDT
On Sun, 20 Jul 1997 18:09:29 -0700, Peter Lewis wrote:
>
>Well said.
>
>In addition, let's not forget the greeting/rules we all received upon
>subscribing to this list, from which I quote the following excerpt verbatim:
>
>QUOTE:
>
> >>> NOTE <<<
>
>In general, advertising of commercial products or services is prohibited on
>this list.
I definantly agree. In the exception where another member of the list says he/she is looking to purchase or
sell something like memory or a hard drive left over from an upgrade might be okay, but I don't agree with
commercially-based companies advertising their over-priced stuff, which is VERY overpriced for me, being in
high school (as we have a reputation for being short of cash quickly! :-( ).
>
>UNQUOTE
>
>
>At 04:52 PM 7/20/97 -0400, axel hartmann wrote:
>>Hello David,
>>
>>Thank you for your persistence in pointing out the facts that
>>are still missing from PEP's postings. I've been on this list
>>for well over a year now.
Such as benchmarks, and telling us whether or not a particular upgrade voids the system's warranty, and
whether they take over the warranty or not.
>>PEP keeps on butting in with advertisements that are at least
>>borderline spam. There are plenty of other companies out there
>>doing the same sort of upgrades which don't advertise on this
>>list. What makes PEP annoying is that they are not at the technical
>>level that this list is generally at. They, or Michael, are not
>>responding to very clear requests to back their claims.
>>
Sounds like traditional advertising to me.
>>Thank you, David, for not giving up!
>>
>>PEP, why don't you answer David's questions? It would make
>>my life easier as well, because I really don't want to have to
>>figure out how spam filters work with Microsoft Exchange...
>>
I don't want to figure out how to do the same on PMMail/2 either.
>>axel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Saturday, July 19, 1997 19:19, David Ross[SMTP:ross_at_math.hawaii.edu]
>wrote:
>>>> I must disagree on one of your points. It is true that the AMD is not a
>true
>>>> Pentium, but in our tests, it benchmarks out as fast as a Pentium 75.
>>>
>>>I do not believe that an AMD586 at 100 mhz (i.e., on a 25mhz system)
>>>will meet a P75 even on non-systemic benchmarks.
>>>
True, because a Pentium is 64-bit (was it internal, external, or both?), while the AMD option is still just 32-bit at
the best. In a ways, it's sort of like comparing a 386DX-40 to a 486SX-25.
>>>Several people on this list have seen a document I produced detailing my
>>>own experiences upgrading a desktop machine to this chip, together with
>several
>>>before-and-after benchmarks (some well-known, some based on real-world
>>>apps). The upgrade was definitely worthwhile for me, but on my desktop
>>>only cost me $40, and I was upgrading from a clock-doubled machine
>>>(instead of clock-tripled like the 701C).
>>>
>>>You say you don't like WInstone, but you don't say what benchmarks you
>>>use instead.
>>>
>>>- David R.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>......................................................................
>> Axel Hartmann .
>> Paper Summer : 30 Kellog Ave; Amherst, MA 01002; USA .
>> Voice only : +1 (413) 256 - 6264 .
>> E-Mail : Axel.Hartmann_at_stud.uni-karlsruhe.de .
>> Homepage : http://www.uni-karlsruhe.de/~Axel.Hartmann .
>>......................................................................
>>
>>
>
Paul Khoury
pkhoury_at_earthlink.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:53:40 EST