[Coco] What would a CoCo successor have to have as a minimum? CORRECTION

[Steve Ostrom]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Ostrom" <smostrom7 at comcast.net>
To: "CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts" <coco at maltedmedia.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Coco] What would a CoCo successor have to have as a minimum?


>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Alex Evans" <alxevans at concentric.net>
> To: "CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts" <coco at maltedmedia.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 8:40 AM
> Subject: Re: [Coco] What would a CoCo successor have to have as a minimum?
>
>
>>
>>
>> --- On Mon, 11/22/10, Mark McDougall <msmcdoug at iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Mark McDougall <msmcdoug at iinet.net.au>
>>> Subject: Re: [Coco] What would a CoCo successor have to have as a 
>>> minimum?
>>> To: "CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts" <coco at maltedmedia.com>
>>> Date: Monday, November 22, 2010, 11:02 PM
>>> On 23/11/2010 2:42 PM, William Astle
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > 5 times more means the difference is five times. Thus,
>>> 5 times more than X
>>> > is actually *6* times X. So 125 is 5 times *as much*
>>> as 25 but 4 times
>>> > *more* than 25.
>>>
>>> I disagree entirely. When someone says "2x faster" they
>>> mean "twice as fast". No-one says "1x faster".
>>
>> You can disagree all you want.  It is true that people do that, they are 
>> wrong, and it can be confusing.  It is just poor English.  Since people 
>> misuse the expression so muych, it is better to just avoid saying x times 
>> more.
>>
>
> Alex, this is your quote from a few days ago.
>
> If one wants to get pedantic, 8ns giving you 125MHz is only 4x faster
> than 25MHz, not 5x faster.
>
> CORRECTION (sorry, bad example earlier): The accuracy is in the way it is 
> phrased.  If the writer says "y = 4 times more than x", then it means that 
> y=5x.  The key is in the use of the word "more" which means "plus".  "4 
> times more than x" means "4x + x" or 5x.  I think the original author said 
> that 125 MHz was 5 times the speed of 25MHz, which is correct.  It would 
> also be correct to say that 125 MHz was 4 times more than 25 MHz.
>