On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm just tired of the limits of the x86 line....640k,8gb.....why don't manf > take into account that just because a 10Tb drive dosen't exist today, one > will exist with 6 or 8 months...and plan.....no, that's too simple....
While I am in -no- way defending some of the dain-bramaged decisions that brought about today's PCs: 1) SCSI, regardless of platform, just wouldn't care. 2) With the ATA/133 spec (48-bit address space), you can go up to 131072 TERABYTES before you run into problems (2^48*512 block). I imagine we will hit it someday. I ain't holdin' my breath on that one. Something that can hold every movie I've ever seen, uncompressed, in a -fraction- of its total capacity is when I actually think demand for bigger drives will begin to slacken. ;-) 3) 640 K is an 8088 limitation that DOS/Windows kept alive until (more or less) Windows 3.0. After the '286, though, "real" OSen stopped having that problem. Does this mean I think X-86 is the be-all end-all? No. Do I think its price:performance ratio wins out over most other platforms? Yes. Especially if AMD's Hammer makes it big in 64-bit land. Are there advantages that Sparc and Alpha systems have (eg. their console modes) that I wish X-86 had? Sure thing. My servers will nevertheless remain X-86, and inexpensive, and not tied to a single CPU vendor's whims. $.02, -Ken _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
