>
>
> On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, Greg Alexander wrote:
>
> > processors with MMU. Linux _does_ run on 386's. Linux has run on Fujitsu
> > AP-5000 monster multiboard ultrasparc toys. Linux runs on Sparc. Linux
> > runs on PPC.
> > I think that Linux supports the full range of hardware, we don't
> > need to worry. I think there are probably more people working on Linux than
> > are working on BSD (and the BSD effort is all split up), so we have no
> > problem with enough manpower to support everything.
> >
> > It'll run on both, and it'll run a lot better than any commercial Unix-like
> > system on both. Everything performs on a 386. A 386 is a _damn_ fast
> > processor. Just 'cause something's worse than something else don't make it
> > bad. :)
> >
>
> Forgive me if I didn't make myself clear. But let me say it another
> way. If the choice is between spending the development time working on 386
> backward compatibility or taking advantage of some new feature of a P7 -
> drop the 386 like a hot potato.
>
Let me say it again :)
Some people do not need 'some new feature'. Some people want to leave
their old 386's as their network firewall or gateway or something. You
don't need a quad P7 to do that kind of thing, a much much MUCH cheaper
386 will do the job quite nicely. I can see if you are doing some heavy
duty development, or are running a large file server or some other type of
processor hungry application or something, then a "more-power" machine is
perfect for you...
So, don't go knocking people trying to get them to upgrade to more power
when they don't need to. You aren't an Intel Rep. are ya? ;)
-Rob