Hello J.R.;

I'd love to see examples of where today's computers seem slower than those
of the 1970s. It's just not the impression I get.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
|\/| Randy A MacDonald   | APL: If you can say it, it's done.. (ram)
|/\| [EMAIL PROTECTED]  |
|\ |                     |If you cannot describe what you are doing
BSc(Math) UNBF'83        þas a process, you don't know what you're doing.
Sapere Aude              |     - W. E. Deming
Natural Born APL'er      | Demo website: http://156.34.89.50/?JGeneral
-----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }-

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Randall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "General forum" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 7:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] spreadsheets


> Don Guinn wrote:
> > Building a spreadsheet is still programming. It's just not procedural.
> > Entering a document with markup into a word processor is also
> > programming. Don't forget the old EAM machines with boards. That was
> > programming too. I am still impressed by that architecture as those were
> > machines with cycle times of as little as 3 hertz and could still
> > outperform today's PCs with gigahertz speeds.
> >
>
> Point taken.  I think many people are more comfortable with hitting recalc
> until the spreadsheet stabilizes than trying to understand how u^:_ works.
>
> I, too am unimpressed with the speed of current computers, especially when
> they are used interactively.  My first personal computer was a TRS-80
> Model III, with 16K RAM and a 2 MHz Z80.  My current computer is about
> 1000 times as fast and has about 50000 times as much memory.  I do not see
> comparable improvements in performance.  In a recent post, Roy Crabtree
> gave examples in the same vein.
>
> Texas Instruments still uses the Z80 (overclocked to 4 MHz) in its
> calculators.  This is a chip which has no floating point arithmetic, and
> does not even have a hardware (integer) multiplication.  The arguments for
> sticking with this come down to the fact that it is good enough for
> interactive use, TI has mature libraries, and power consumption is low.  A
> calculator will run for months on AA batteries.  Compare this with cell
> phones.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> John
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to