OpenEuphoria

Re: 8k. the system handled 24 concurrent users

• Posted by Kat <gertie at PELL.NET> Mar 22, 2001
• 467 views

On 21 Mar 2001, at 22:50, T.Gottwald at DEUTSCHEPOST.DE wrote:

> Thats funny,
> 
> 25 years before your >>8k. system handled 24 concurrent users<< today this
> WINDOWS-System with 200 MB RAM has trouble handling ONE user . So what will
> be in 25 years ? We will have multiple Systems each one with 24 Processors and
> they will not be enough for 1 user ...

I tend to agree, with the caveat that what that one user expects out of the 
machine will be vastly more than what 25 users expect today. I still say 
more processors is the way to go. Rather than buying mainframes, some hi-
end users are now buying generic desktop PCs with linux and forming 
clusters that outrun the mainframes, at fractions of the cost. For the cost of 
one new 1.1Ghz processor, you can buy 4 complete working puters in the 
600Mhz range. When i got proficient with the C64 (the vic 20 and ZX80 
weren't up to it, imho), i came soooo close to doing a cluster of C64's,, since 
i had the floppy drive running my programs too. 
 
> Another out-of-topic thing: The Computers needed 25 years to rech the first
> GHz
> (1 GHz-PC). The next GHz will be in range in 1 Year.

/me looks at the (w)reched computer industry. Probably not, line geometries 
are appoaching the limits of physics to move electrons properly. For some 
tasks, optical puters might work better. Remember the old dual processor 
chips, and the way processors now are not only pipelined, but paralleled 
internally, so in effect, you may not know if you are using a multiprocessor 
puter now. And clock speed isn't everything, the 6502 and the 6800 could 
outrun a 8mhz 8080 in getting the job done.  
 
> Have fun

You too!
Kat