On Thu, 1 Jul 1999, Michael Kukat wrote:

> > Ignatios, of all the port lists to grumble to about slow CPU speeds and
> > other resource limitations, I'd imagine that port-vax is not a very good
> > choice :-)
> 
> Hey, it's the fun in those boxes. If i want performance, i go out and
> take a P-III-500 with 128 MB RAM and 8 MB graphics (today's windows
> standard :-) and install PTS-DOS. This is REAL performance :-) But is it
> the VAX fun ?

Hey, I'm probably the single strongest proponent of the Zen of the slow
VAX. :-) 

I mean, we have to be number one in something, and we easily beat out all
the other ports with the highest metrics in several areas:

[1]  BTUs/instruction
[2]  time/instruction
[3]  Number of different CPU instructions.

The ideal *slow* NetBSD/vax machine shall be a MicroVAX-I w/G_float
support doing semi-emulated D_float FP math.  This is my quest.

-brian.
---
Brian "JARAI" Chase | http://world.std.com/~bdc/ | VAXZilla LIVES!!!