Nice Find - test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

5 Apr 1998

...
 The cached (486) and highly piplined (pentium and
friends) are more 
variable as the clock speed is only an indicator of performance and if 
the code runs with a log of cache misses the speed can really drop to 
nothing.  I know as the external cache croaked on my 486/25 and I ran 
for a bit with the internal cache turned off and the performance was 
worse than a 286/12! With the internal cache running it was only about 
10% off the performance of the 64k external cache.  Just to give you  and 
...
 idea. Are you saying that a 486 is only faster
than a 286 because of the
cache?
...
 <That's one, but there are many others.  You
could recompile them to be
<optimized for a 386, though.

Funny I have unix v7 running on a PDP11 with only 256kb of ram. it can  be 
...
 done. Isn't v7 the latest UNIX distribution?
...
 <><>Windows 3.1 does run on it with the
1meg.
<>Runs good and most software that will fit in 1meg runs ok.  Swapping  is
...
 <>heavy though so a fast disk helps. I once
had an old 386 with a 20MB MFM hard drive and 2MB RAM. Windows
ran OK, but Word 2.0 ran very poorly. Strange that I've never seen
3.0. Is it rare?
...

IF you mean running netscape, that monster wants a minimum of 8m just  to 
...
 run and will still crash if pressed.  Wordperfect for
windows runs  great,
...
 as does Word3.0 in 1meg.  There are a lot of older
packages that run  real 
...
 well in winders3.1 and 2meg or less.

Actually, Windows 3.0 came with a copy of MS-DOS executive, the
precursor to the program manager, while 3.1 didn't. That's not
bad, as well as the ability to run real mode programs.
...
 Windoes 3.0 was not widely supported and it was
upgraded to 3.1. 
...
 <already have.  BTW, where can I get a lisence+docs,
disks for Windows  2.x
Well, someone from this list let me copy his. It's not bad, but needs
DOS Version 3.3. You can use Setver for the same thing, but you will
have to disable it for Windows 95, which needs at least 7.0. I have
DOS 3.3, and it's a good DOS. If only it had MOVE...I can send anyone
who wants them some copies. I THINK I have four more boxes. Five are
already spoken for.

It's too bad that Linux needs so much space and so little RAM. I
would rather have somewhat of a greater balance... I installed red
hat recently, and it's an awful pain, just like slackware. I wish
I could install Mac System 1.0 on my PC without emulators...
...
 Yes I did with help from a few people.  The system
it's on is a  386DX/33
...
 with 128k cache and a 420mb IDE and a CDrom. I'm
not running X on it as  it 
...
 only has 8megs and a low end VGA board currently. 
I'm not that 
enthusastic over it as somea re.

Allison

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com