From owner-freebsd-hardware Wed Jul 10 21:00:31 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA11620 for hardware-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA11614 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 21:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id XAA00628; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 23:56:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199607110356.XAA00628@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: Michael Smith cc: stesin@elvisti.kiev.ua, Kevin_Swanson@blacksmith.com, hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: muliport boards - building a PPP dialup server In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 06 Jul 1996 19:42:42 +0930. <199607061012.TAA23745@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 23:56:12 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message <199607061012.TAA23745@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>you write: >Jacob M. Parnas stands accused of saying: >> > >> >Quatech do a card called the DS-100 with a pair of PC16550D's and an 18MHz >> >clock and a jumperable /1 /2 /5 /10 divider that will allow your to >> >run your 16550 ports significantly faster. >> > >> >Unfortunately, they tried to implement the card properly, and as such >> >we have had serious problems with the cards in fast (>486/33) machines. >> >> It shouldn't be a hard thing. Simply build a fifo which has say a 1 >> Megabit of memory on it (pretty cheap these days). It sends an >> interrupt if it goes from full to not full or another if it reaches >> half full. If known by the kernel not to be empty, empty it 25 >> times/second (if it was full at 10 MB/sec, it would be emptied in >> 1/80th of a second.) That's fast, cheap, and will go very fast. >> I'm not even hardware oriented, but can see that it wouldn't be hard >> or difficult to build or program, and would support very fast I/O. In my opinion, when people can't back up their statements or opinions with logical arguments, the smart ones admit their stumped, the rest resort to personal insults. I didn't insult you. I don't see why you want to turn this from an polite discussion or bow out instead of what should go to alt.flame. >Out of the mouths of babes - Jacob, it's _blindingly_obvious_ that you >don't know spit about hardware. Attempting to discuss this with you >would be like trying to talk existentialism with a donkey. Purely a personal insult. No substance behind the statement at all. >Or do you honestly believe that you, with your self-avowed lack of >hardware orientation, can come up with something that hasn't been done >before? Are you _really_ that concieted? Purely a personal insult. No substance behind the statement at all. I have very little training in economics, but I knew that Digital and IBM were in trouble when most of their business was significantly overpriced for no increase in production (comparing workstations to mainframes in the late 1980's). In other words, because I'm more software oriented than hardware doesn't mean I'm wrong about a hardware statement. >> Back to the personal insults. This is where I step off. I have better >> things to do than act like elementary school kids trading insults. What's >> next? "My daddy can beat up your daddy". >Jacob; you butt in on a discussion brandishing your swollen ignorance >and your myopic perspecive in everyone's face, and then burst into >tears when this is pointed out to you. There is nothing 'mature' in >this attitude, so I can't see what you're complaining about. Believe me, I'm not bursting into tears over this. If you review your statements in the message I'm responding to, you'll see there isn't anything but personal insults from you in it and not one single attempt at a criticism of why my design would not work. I know its not optimal, but it isn't overly expensive and have no reason to believe it wouldn't work work. >> Jacob M. Parnas I think most people see this newsgroup as a vehicle to help eachother rather than flame eachother. Responding to a message is not "butting into a discussion". I don't consider what my role in this thread particularly mature but polite and trying to be helpful. More normal than mature. On the other hand, your response is in my opinion, extremely immature and inappropriate for this discussion. Its just a personal flame against me with no substance behind it. Read it again, and I think you'll see that what I say is true. >-- >]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ >]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ >]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ >]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ >]] Collector of old Unix hardware. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[ Jacob M. Parnas