* Hunter Peress <hu.peress@mail.mcgill.ca> [2002-12-30 17:30]:
>> It simply isn't bullshit. I am using Debian on one 486 and some 586 on
>> my own, and I know that there are others. Don't call facts bullshit.
>
> Actually, it does this argument no good to cite your particular
> situation.
Why? Our priority is our users. As long as there are i386 users we
shall have it, and I'm quite confident that we _will_.
If you misunderstood me before, I am not sure what you are trying to
do: If you are longing to replace i386 with i686 you will have no chance
with your efforts, IMNSHO. If on the other hand you like to have i686
next to i386 I'd say go for it, give it a try.
> Next, my proposal is simply to get an i686 distro out there, and
> through this experimentation it should become obvious that it is in
> higher demand than i386.
Well, but that doesn't eliminate the need for i386, and that's my
point. Btw., do you have an idea if i686 optimized would perform better
or bader on an AMD?
> I'm very new to debian. So you must understand
> that this is why I am reaching out to the community.
Well, then you definitely used the wrong tone. If you like to reach
out to the community then shouting and them and trying to force someone
to do something is the wrong way. Getting them interested is the
correct way. With your harrash tone you get noone interested IMHO.
> Next, these results will definitely prove what I have been saying. (if
> they dont, then approximately 10 billion dollars of intel research is
> down the drain (eg a fraction of the 40 billion they spent...) ).
Uh? Intel researched about gcc optimization efforts? I thought they
researched about processor optimization?
> but I think that making it completely like another architecture is the
> way to go, instead of replacing the major packages within the i386
> arch).
Definitely. Replacing i386 will do Debian no good. It did strike
Mandrake already that they don't have anything for a 486 anymore.
Again, our priority is our users, and we don't drop them just because
they might be some minority, like others (did you know that RedHat stop
Sparc & Alpha support with next release?).
> At this point, there should be an i686 distro.
Additional to i386, not to replace it. That's my main point, replacing
i386 is a dead end street.
> Beyond: Enjoy the fruits of laber. Laugh at gentoo (or be scared of them
> (who knows what they'll be like at this point)).
Why are you upset with gentoo? I don't understand why we must laugh at
others at all? There is enough place in the world for everyone. Yes,
even for microsoft(tm).
> all these angry attitudes make me feel horrible (btw, when i say
> bullshit, its not directed at anyone)).
Man, you have guts. Sorry, I didn't see any real angry attitudes in
this thread but yours. Please apply the same rules of judgement to
yourself that you apply to others.
And if you say bullshit it still is what it is: bullshit. Regardless
to whom you might (not) direct it. But in this case you directed it at
i386 users. Did I notice already that i386 users are also our users and
our priority?
So long!
Alfie
--
"By IBM supporting Linux well then it is not a toy."
-- Steve Ballmer, Microsoft
<http://www.crn.com/Components/Search/Article.asp?ArticleID=24944>
Attachment:
pgpYwjkZKQSs7.pgp
Description: PGP signature