Tue, 3 Jun 1997 21:54:56 -0600 (MDT)

On 06/03/97 10:41 AM John Falkenthal said...
>> From: andrew meggs <insect@Antennahead.COM>
>> Subject: Re:
>> ...and I went and looked at the stats page and noticed that yes, SGI was
>> missing, but Microsoft was every bit as absent. Can you shed some
>I have no information about an effort underway at Micro$oft. SGI on the
>otherhand... :-) SGI is well ahead of deschall in terms of keyspace
>searched, but they are not sustaining the same search rate as deschall -
>suggests they had a healthy head-start... To be honest, I don't know how
>"serious" the effort is within SGI - my guess is its not too serious. I
>apologize if my use of the word "serious" got everyone in deschall on the
>defensive. They are running on everything from low-end desktops up to
>T90 and T3E. Any SGI'ers care to comment further?
>One other thing - I had made earlier comments about not wanting to see
>thing cracked on Bloatware 95; Linux and OS/2 are a different story
>altogether. I run Linux @ home - in fact, check the deschall stats and
>you'll see "" listed somewhere down in the 500 range - that's me
>at home, on my lowly K5-133 running Linux !!

I just checked the 7 day stats page and found your listed at #629.
My also lowly Pentium 100 running 'Bloatware 95' is ranked at #553
( Are you running other programs a significant portion of the
time? Mine gets used for other things for a few hours in the morning and in
the evening, and the rest of the time it's been crunching away. I have a copy
of Red Hat Linux 4.1 on my machine also, which I've been using as a tool to
try to learn unix. I find that it is much more difficult to get a program to run
properly under Linux (of course, admittedly, I am a real novice at Linux). For
those of us that are used to Windows 95, it works very well in a single user
scenario. I can see that Linux would be infinitely better for a multi-user
environment, but that isn't what my computer is used for.

Mark J. Verdi