> : Yes, but I've been doing most of my benchmarks on a PPro and plain
> : P5's. And some of the target machines they have in mind are lowly
> : 386's or 486's. 386 embedded systems are expensive enough, going to
> : 486 or beyond adds a lot to the cost.
>
> Anyone who is telling you this needs to do their homework. Go look at
> StrongARM and get NDAed. They will offer your pricing which is more
> attractive and offer you a part that has far lower power and power/MIPS
> costs. I know what I'm talking about, go check it out, you'll be glad
> you did. If you don't get the info you need, contact me privately and
> I'll put you in touch with the right people.
None the less, several of my friends (engineering graduates) work with
embedded systems at their day jobs and 386s are very common.
On another issue, I've been very upset by the behaviour exhibited by a
number of people on this thread. It's an often repeated claim, by Eric
Raymond or on Kernel Traffic or in half a dozen other places, that one
great benefit of having the Linux source code is that arguments can be
settled on technical grounds alone.
However I've seen a lot of name calling, a lot of insults, a lot of in
your face attitude and a fair bit of chest beating. I haven't seen all
that much discussion over the technical issues. Richard has claimed he
can make the code neater with his changes, so I assume there's a patch
available. How about arguing over the patch?
If there isn't a patch then this is all rather pointless. But I cannot
see a great deal of sense in beating Richard into submission before he
even tries to write the patch. Wait until it's written, then shoot big
holes in it. If Richard does not write the patch then the problem goes
away. If he does write it then Linux can only benefit or break even.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/