• To: mc@x... (Mike Champion)
• Subject: Re: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 10:18:02 -0500 (EST)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <2W3235232YXB9PGBHD93TOOLPPLV.3c96005e@MChamp> from "Mike Champion" at Mar 18, 2002 09:57:34 AM

Mike Champion scripsit:

> I don't know much about this, but we don't hear much about "RISC" 
> processors anymore.  Is this a "failure" for the 80/20 rule,
> or an example that well-hidden complexity can survive and prosper?
> Or has RISC quietly succeeded and it's just not news anymore?

You are almost certainly reading this email on a computer with a
RISC processor -- pretending to be a CISC processor.

-- 
John Cowan <jcowan@r...>     http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith.  --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_

• Follow-Ups:
  • (off-topic) RISC
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>

• References:
  • Re: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SV: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
• Next by Date: RE: SV: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
• Previous by thread: Re: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
• Next by thread: (off-topic) RISC
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread