Re: Is microprocessor an integrated circuit???
From: keith (krw_at_att.bizzzz)
Date: 01/29/05
- Next message: Nathan Hunsperger: "MOSFET damage"
- Previous message: Rich Grise: "Re: How use an IDE HDD with AVR?"
- In reply to: Bradley1234: "Re: Is microprocessor an integrated circuit???"
- Next in thread: Spehro Pefhany: "Re: Is microprocessor an integrated circuit???"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:42:51 -0500
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 19:33:19 +0000, Bradley1234 wrote:
>
> "keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
> news:pan.2005.01.29.18.14.11.467455@att.bizzzz...
>> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 22:33:18 +0000, Bradley1234 wrote:
<severe snip mode on>
>> They were incompetent, obviously. Your education is sorely lacking as a
>> result. Add that to your suit.
>
> Let me ask you a simple question, do you know what BiCMOS is? (not a trick
> question)
Sure. We do a lot of it. What's BiCMOS got to do with definition
of "byte" or "microprocessor".
<more snips>
>> > Its like arguing that the inch scale of measurement is arbitrary, its
>> > not. With only a few rare exceptions in history, a byte is 8 bits,
>> > and is the standard. We note with disk and memory sizes, they are
>> > rated in Mega or Giga bytes. Network interface speeds in Mega bytes
>> > per second.
>>
>> Its not rare and can be redefined. The definition of a "byte" is dot
>> fixed at a certain size. Get over it. Learn your lesson and move
>> along.
>
> You have never shown any evidence of this being the current standard,
> yet you continue to claim the byte definition is arbitrary, and want to
> hurry to change the subject now when there is nothing to support what
> you thought was an arbitrary byte size
You simply can't read. I gave you a link to a site that quotes the 'C'
standard clearly defining a byte as not necessarily being eight bits. Why
would the "sizeof(byte)" function be in 'C' if the answer were a constant?
tell you what... GO over to one of the "architecture" groups, like
COMP.ARCH, or COMP.LANG.C and propose that a byte is defined as eight
bits or ask why sizeof(byte) is needed since tha answer is *always* 8.
Be warned; wear your nomex panties.
>
>> > Western Digital could double their disk size by saying a byte is now
>> > 16 bits wide.
>>
>> If they were selling it to be used in a 16 bit byte machine, sure
>> (wrong way, but I get your drift). Since they're advertizing it (and
>> it's formatted for) a system that uses 8 bit bytes they have to be
>> consistent with the size.
>>
>> I bet it torques your jaws that they measure the size in decimal too.
>
> right, 4 bit byte would double it not 16. but decimal? not a problem
Why, they're lieing, aren;t they? Clearly a gigabyte is 2^30 bytes, no?
>> > One of the other factors in using the byte system is the Base 2 math,
>> > and unless IM mistaken shifting left or right will double or divide
>> > by 2 the binary base 2 number. Designers would therefore prefer a
>> > byte that is a multiple, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32
>>
>> Six bit bytes were common. IIRC the CDC Ciber series had a 60bit word
>> and a 6bit byte. As has been noted IBM talks of a 10bit byte in one of
>> the I/O processors.
>>
>>
> the CDC Cyber series, but is there any documentation on those old
> Seymore designs? how can we verify the internal cpu stuff anymore? They
> got much of the architecture from Univac some would argue
Ask on alt.folklore.computers. The users, developers, and architects
hang out there. That doesn't change sizeof(byte) is not a constant.
<snip>
>> > When a person begins losing a debate and has no declarative or
>> > informative contribution, the discussion degrades into separate and
>> > unique steps, personal attacks (pig stupid), then profanity, then
>> > rage, then violence.
>>
>> Violence? No. Frustration with a pig-headed troll? Certainly.
>
> Im here responding and taking smack from people and discussing the
> point, hardly trollish. newbie to the forum, yes.
Well, the fact that you picked up on two wrong assertions in the same
thread and fight like a tasmanian devil to keep your ignorance, the
thought had crossed my mind. I've more than once looked down my throat
for a hook.
>> > If you claim to have understood binary at that specific point in
>> > time? you would be over 100 years old. Congratulations that you are
>> > coherent and not senile
>>
>> More than half that, but I was doing binary (and in all bases up to 32
>> - got awkward above) in fifth grade, well more than forty years ago.
>> You simply sounded like a snot-nosed kid who thinks he knows
>> everything.
>
> Yeah, a lot of people say that.
I understand completely.
<snip>
>> > Yes I researched the site, the oddball, erroneous, unauthorized uses
>> > of the term "byte" exist. But the SAE measurement of inches has a
>> > better chance to be converted to metric than the byte has a chance of
>> > being other than 8 bits.
>>
>> You're hopeless. I hope you're not involved in any engineering more
>> complicated than a toaster
>
> I was trying to get work at a nuke u lar facility doing control systems.
> seriously
OMG! And to think I'm a nuke proponent. Well, it's clear I can't
correct your ignorance, but you've certainly done the trick for me!
>
>> > When a byte is represented as 9 bits, the 8 bits remain as the data
>> > the extra bit is a parity bit, meaning its a type of wrapper
>> > component, not a literal 9-bit word. If anyone in history combined 3
>> > octal digits into a 9 bit word? its technically not the same.
>>
>> Did I say anything about parity or prepresentations of binary numbers?
>> I'm talking about sizeof(byte) *not* being fixed at eight. It is
>> *usually* equal to eight, but if you assume that it's a fact it will
>> come back to byte someone. ;-)
>
>
> sizeof() sounds very C-ish and in 100% of the time, is 8 bits wide, in
> application.
Wrong. Why would it be there if it was a constant? Hint: It's there
*because* the programmer cannot assume it for all ISAs.
> The only thing close to challenging this is a quote from a
> $400 book that probably doesnt have pictures, that says byte is at least
> 8 bits.
The 'C' starndard doesn't say it has to be any size, but must be big
enough to represent the character set, which in practice makes the lower
limit six.
> Find anywhere in C code today that redefines sizeof(byte) as other than
> 8 bits that would suggest the byte isnt commonly 8 bits. I would design
> a nuke u lar system controller thing and rest assured a byte is 8 bits
> and not worry at all.
That really scares me! SOmeone *so* arrogant to contradict the standards
doing *anything* more critical than making toast.
> Sizeof(char) or ulong or ushort? They are all relative.
Why are you changing subjects? We're talking "byte" not "char".
>
>> <snip>
>>
>> >> > Yet you havent shown where people, today, in business, use the
>> >> > byte for MORE than 8 bits? Not in some novelty scenario 40 years
>> >> > ago thats long gone, does Intel use a non 8-bit byte? Xilinx?
>> >> > Altera? Microsoft?
>>
>> IBM? Yes. The official 'C' Standard. Yes. Life? Yes. Get over it,
>> you're wrong.
>>
>>
> what does ibm ( a small typewriter company) have to do with the official
> C standard?
Nothing (other than they have representatives on the various
standards committies). I gave two (not one) examples of where you're
wrong.
>
>> >> Retard, you were arguing not a half-day ago that ninety thousand
>> >> years ago a "microprocessor" was defined as being a processor that
>> >> was microcoded (absolutely wrong). Now you decide that all
>> >> processors made *today* have eight-bit bytes, thus a byte is
>> >> *defined* to be 8-bits.
>> >
>> > Thats what it means, by the majority of the industry, and your
>> > failure to provide any examples in the industry show that I was
>> > correct
>> >
>> I've proven your definition wrong by example. There are many
>> "microprocessors" that are *not* microprogrammed. There are many
>> microprogrammed processors that are *not* microprocessors. An IBM 360
>> is hardly a microprocessor, though the "same architecture" some forty
>> years later, known as the z-Series are, in fact, microprocessors. Some
>> models are microprogrammed, some are hard-wired. The terms are
>> othogonal.
>>
>> Yet you've not shown one authoritative example of a VAX-11/780 being
>> called a "microprocessor".
>
>
> The dispute was that some thought my calling it 11/780 cpu somehow
> implied the entire system. Have you ever seen a real working 11/780?
> Ever taken out the cpu board set?
THe processor is not a microprocessor. It is made of several components,
this *not* a microprocessor. Yes, I was instrumental in purchasing an
11/780 in the mid 80s. I know a *liitle* about it. Tell you what, trott
on over to alt.folklore.computers and tell the good folks over there that
the VAX-11/780 was a microprocessor. Again, wear your nomex shorts.
> its micro programmed, IIRC
Irrelevant. So were most of the IBM 360 line (only the /75 was
hard-wired), but they were *not* microprocessors by any accepted meaning.
>> >> The fact is that you're wrong, twice. In fact you haven't been
>> >> right about anything yet. ...but are pig-headed enough to continue
>> >> on fighting your 0-n-2 record. Give it up and flip burgers. You'll
>> >> be a lot less dangerous in a McD's.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> > Well then you wont want to know Ive contributed for years to make
>> > those things that launch into orbit whatever they are called, go up
>> > and keep the range safe so they fly up there and spin around or
>> > whatever they do.
>> >
>> > I dont believe a McD's would hire me with my resume, too
>> > overqualified
>>
>> They're afraid you couldn't learn the process.
>
> That should be a challenge for an MBA type, to apply to McD as someone
> needing a job, get hired, do well, make improvements, get some award etc
> and not tell them about the MBA thing, do it for the exercise.
MBA types have shown that they can learn. What it is they learn may be in
question, but...
>
>
> !
>> >
>> > Okay you win, Im sorry to upset you so much, if you want to say a 6
>> > bit byte is a byte... no, I wont do it, youre wrong, I cant even
>> > pretend to concede, its an 8 bit byte
>>
>> You can continue life being ignorant or you can learn. Your choice.
>
> Im not from Missouri but you just have to show me. I think when we
> examine the details of a web link we do not actually find a change in
> byte size definition. I like to learn but need fact checking, not
> assuming something.
You've been shown you're wrong, but will not see.
>
> Somebody said that if "I" claimed the sky was blue they would double
> check it? Good for you! Thats how it should be, not kissing somebodys
> back end and assuming they can make decisions for you, learn to do the
> work yourself.
If most here said the sky was blue we'd know form previous experience that
it was likely to be so. If you said it, we'd have to rethink our
experience and check it just to make sure. Is that clearer?
>
>
>> >> > Do you use 2629 code? Hollerith punched cards? if not, why not? I
>> >> > want, no I demand all computers today be equipped with a Hollerith
>> >> > punched card reader that uses 2629 code.
>> >
>> > Well if you knew binary over 100 years ago, you should then of course
>> > know about the Hollerith punched card and what 2629 is.
>>
>> I know what an 026 is, and an 029. I used them in college, and a
>> couple of times since. 2629 to me is the model number of my laptop
>> (ThinkPad A21p).
>>
>> > I like punched card equipment, it was fun to work on with the
>> > mechanical stuff and electrical also.
>>
>> My guess is that you're not talking about a ThinkPad.
>
> No, the original punched card equipment
>
> http://www.iso.org/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage.CatalogueDetail?CSNUMBER=7606&scopelist=
>
> I guess ISO 2629:1973 isnt used much anymore. It was one of those
> tactics that ibm (a small typewriter comany) used to force equipment
> makers to adopt one standard so they could get competitors to copy it,
> then ibm would change and make the best equipment with a different
> standard, forcing smaller companies out of business.
That still doesn't change the definition of a "byte" or "microprocessor"
just to make you happy.
>
If you're so interested in corporate "ethics" and other "dirty tricks",
why are you funding BillG and M$.
>
>> >> Stupid is as stupid types.
>> >>
>> >> Anyone else reading along will see that you're hopeless and won't go
>> >> down the quagmire you call a road. I feel sorry for anyone who has
>> >> to pick up your messes.
>> >
>> > Well people do say everyone has to work harder when Im around
>> >
>> To clean up your messes, no doubt.
>
> No, I mean people tend to be lazy and pawn off work onto others or spend
> the time web surfing. If you can imagine, people get annoyed with me
> when Im persistent and in their business asking for results at work. I
> drive people to get results, irritating them like nails across the
> blackboard which I find soothing to listen to. In past jobs co workers
> complained about me, the managers wanted to promote me. doesnt make
> sense.
Ah, so you're just a prick that turns in your cow-orkers to management.
>
>
>
>> BTW, a decent newsreader would be a good "investment".
>>
>> --
>> Keith
BTW, a decent newsreader would be a good "investment". But at least your
not a top-poster, so there may be hope yet...
-- Keith
- Next message: Nathan Hunsperger: "MOSFET damage"
- Previous message: Rich Grise: "Re: How use an IDE HDD with AVR?"
- In reply to: Bradley1234: "Re: Is microprocessor an integrated circuit???"
- Next in thread: Spehro Pefhany: "Re: Is microprocessor an integrated circuit???"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
