Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 13:17:58 05/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 20, 2002 at 04:41:28, Torstein Hall wrote:
>On May 19, 2002 at 23:44:35, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On May 19, 2002 at 15:43:59, Torstein Hall wrote:
>>
>>>On May 19, 2002 at 11:49:18, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 19, 2002 at 02:24:13, pavel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On May 19, 2002 at 02:16:39, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On May 18, 2002 at 23:24:53, pavel wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On May 18, 2002 at 18:47:31, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hello,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>With pleasure i announce the results of
>>>>>>>>gcc 3.1 versus microsoft visual c++ 6.0
>>>>>>>>sp4 processor pack.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Till recently nothing kicked it at the K7, except
>>>>>>>>intel c++ 5.01 (but newer editions of intel were way
>>>>>>>>way slower than msvc).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>For DIEP gcc 3.1 is about 5% faster than msvc is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Note that msvc 6.0 sp4 + processor pack is about
>>>>>>>>2% faster than any other msvc version is for me
>>>>>>>>(at least what everyone can get somehow in the
>>>>>>>>shop + download). it's 2% faster than msvc 7.0 NET
>>>>>>>>for example or msvc 6.0 sp5 procpack, because
>>>>>>>>it seems the optimizations turned on in the processor
>>>>>>>>pack for msvc 6 sp4 are not working for other service
>>>>>>>>packs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Now a FREE compiler is faster, which is pretty shocking!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Time to compiler my GUI for linux!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What makes you think the guys at MS makes MSVC for Chess Programs?
>>>>>>>Speed is only important in Chess Programs (or similar programs thats speed
>>>>>>>dependend).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Sure, they added speed optimization only for chess programmers, and anyway who
>>>>>>cares about chess programs?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In speed maybe other compilers are better, but what makes the differance is the
>>>>>>>overall performance and features.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What makes the difference is the fact that it is recommended by big brother, and
>>>>>>that you are going to have compatibility problems with the next version of big
>>>>>>brother's browser/disoperating system if you do not use big brother's compiler.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Now that's quite a feature.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I personally wouldnt care less bashing on MS for this reason.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>He didn't bash MS for this. He just said that GCC 3.1 is faster for his program.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Anyway, saying that a Microsoft product sucks isn't bashing. Most of the time it
>>>>>>is true. And when it is not, the fact that they want to push it into your throat
>>>>>>at any price is a reason good enough for bashing them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Bash Microsoft everyday. If you do not know why, I can tell you that THEY know
>>>>>>why (and you'll discover it later).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>If you dont like MSVC use GCC (free save money!), dont like MSWindows, use Linux
>>>>>>>(free save money!)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If you do not like Windows... say it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And yes, try to move to Linux if possible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Obviously this thread or discussion is not directed towards MS but rather at
>>>>>>>Eugene, it doesnt take a genius to figure that out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There are smart and respectable people working for Microsoft. Eugene is one of
>>>>>>them IMO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christophe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Me not MS slave.
>>>>>Me not MS fan.
>>>>>Me use Linux too.
>>>>>Me like Linux.
>>>>>Me bash MS too, but not unessesary.
>>>>>
>>>>>Me waiting for CT15.
>>>>>
>>>>>;)
>>>>>pavs
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>It is coming... ;-)
>>>>
>>>>BTW I'm trying Linux too, but I can't get used to it. I thought it was small and
>>>>elegant, but actually it is as bloated as Windows and quite slower.
>>>>
>>>>And too hard to use. The guys who write programs for Linux only have the
>>>>experienced users in mind. Fatal mistake.
>>>>
>>>>Shit. I really hoped to get rid of Windows, but Linux is still not ready.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Christophe
>>>
>>>We tried to set up an PC with some free Linux pack called Star Office, or
>>>something like that, at the office. It was so slow as to be usless on a 500Mhz
>>>Celleron. I have to admit that we did not work very hard to optimise etc. but
>>>that should not be needed for a simple Wordporocessing and Spreadsheet PC.
>>>
>>>Torstein
>>
>>
>>StarOffice is known to be big and slow.
>>
>>Maybe what you are looking for is the Koffice suite (several simple office
>>programs like a word processor and spreadsheet) or CrossOffice (allows to
>>install and run the real MS Office under Linux, yes, and it works fine!)
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>Thanks for the tip Christophe, but I think I will have a hard time to get our
>system department to try out a Linux package again......
>
>But as long as it is free, compared to the insane pricing MS is trying for their
>newer Windows variations, I got to try again. (I actually find Win XP a excelent
>product at a wrong pricepoint. We will probably not use it before pricing
>becomes much more reasonable!)
The price will never be reasonable.
That's the price to pay when you allow someone to get a monopol.
We know that since years, but we never really cared, did we?
You will be forced to use XP, and you will be forced to buy it at the high
price.
What? You believe you live in a free world?
Christophe
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.