Hi, On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Jack <gykazequ...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > Intel "giveth" NOTHING, and followeth only "All we want is MONEY!", > same as Gates & Co.! In my opinion, absolutely NO excuse for AHCI > that a better-written Windows driver could NOT have solved, but for > Intel as-always wanting to sell-Sell-SELL new chips!
In fairness, not every person is truly as diligent, intelligent, and experienced as you are. So while "in theory", somebody could rewrite Windows drivers or whatever to be 10x faster or smaller or better, it's probably just wishful thinking. We can't fulfill every dream, it's not realistic. > As I have noted, (A) AHCI is USELESS for DOS, as DOS does "One at a > time" I-O and cannot make use of AHCI's much-touted "Native command > queuing", and (B) AHCI is RIDICULOUSLY complex, the obvious results > of it being designed by a [MISERABLE!] "ANSI committee" which tried > to satisfy EVERYBODY and in the end satisfied NOBODY, as-usual! Yes, unpopular standards by committee are no better than no standard. But sometimes compromise is all you can get. You win some, you lose some. > Hardware improvements like those you mention will never "hurt" any > existing software, only make it faster. Not always the case, sometimes software misunderstands or interacts badly with more RAM or faster cpu. Also the timings for cpu instructions change, so what was once faster (e.g. 186 optimizations [ENTER, LEAVE] vs. 8086) is now "comparatively" slower (to its counterpart, e.g. 2.5 times slower). But yes, cpus themselves are mostly faster due to higher clock speed, microcode improvements, etc. > As for poor-old "C" com- > pilers, which ALSO try to satisfy everybody and end-up satisfying > NOBODY, maybe you can understand why I prefer assembly-language! > No "constraints" on what code you generate, except your own!! It's true, assembly will always win, but few are willing to go that far. Some even call C "portable assembly", but it's not really. I'm not saying it has no use, but it's overrated. At least with assembly you can disregard calling conventions and memory models and do whatever is necessary. (And yes, C has some type safety issues, compilation speed issues, pointer aliasing issues, etc. But it's where most compiler optimizations are focused due to heavy use in the outside world. Sometimes "worse" is "better" only because more people work on it.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF email is sponsosred by: Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
