Re: Mac 68k performance [Was: Macintosh PPC Performance]

James E. Hoyt (jimhoyt@umich.edu)
Wed, 18 Jun 1997 15:16:51 -0400 (EDT)


Hmmm, my guess is that the slowest machine would be one running NT with
that spiffy screen-saver MS provides...

On Wed, 18 Jun 1997, Greg Trotter wrote:

> At 11:15 AM 6/18/97 -0400, David Weingart wrote:
> >>sheesh! first it was the my machine's bigger than yours, now its the
> >>Mines Smaller! Ha!
> >>
> >>Well whats the SLOWEST machine in a natural state (were not talking
> >>about ripping the clock out and dropping it 100 fold, or deactivating
> >>turbo on PCs, or nicing -19 then leaving quake running)... I think a
> >>386sx16 running linux might get some pretty low numbers....
> >>
> >>/kc
> >
> >How far back will the mac client go? 68030? 68020? 68000?
> >
> >I could probably rig up a demo of a mac II running deschall. It would take
> >a little work, but there's even a mac plus or two floating around the
> >place. I could roust a 1200 baud modem and I'm in business.
>
> I can't promise a Mac Plus, but I can fire up a Mac LC (68020) in a couple
> of hours... we have over a dozen still in service.
>
> - greg
> --
> Greg Trotter
> Production Manager, Student Publications
> The University of Oklahoma
> greg@ou.edu
>