Linked by Nicholas Blachford on Wed 9th Jul 2003 16:43 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y This article started life when I was asked to write a comparison of x86 and PowerPC CPUs for work. We produce PowerPC based systems and are often asked why we use PowerPC CPUs instead of x86 so a comparison is rather useful. While I have had an interest in CPUs for quite some time but I have never explored this issue in any detail so writing the document proved an interesting exercise. I thought my conclusions would be of interest to OSNews readers so I've done more research and written this new, rather more detailed article. This article is concerned with the technical differences between the families not the market differences.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Funny to read
by sillyness on Thu 10th Jul 2003 17:18 UTC

I thought the article was great. It summed up a lot of facts that obviously offend MANY people that are at the butt end of the article. But even more entertaining was reading the comments left by those people.

I bet the president of Intel himself could publicly declare that RISC is superior to CISC and the wintellies will still be unsatisfied. But for no real reason other than the fact that they laid down hard earned cash for their machines, and are almost obligated to defend their decisions, in whichever way they can. So its understandable.

And maybe they DO have real reasons. I know a lot of people do. They're required to run software that runs only on intel machines, or RISC machines (we'll name none specific) are too cost prohibitive. That too is understandable.

But after 12 years of working with Intel powerd machines (and a few AMD) I had nothing really tying me to them, other than years of experience. So I moved on.