> What is not possible, that it was IBM or Amdahl did it? Sorry, my rant was not clear. Operating systems in particular have pretty significant dependencies on the instruction set architecture. It is just impossible to run a Microsoft Windows operating system (binary) on anything that isn't a faithful implementation of the Intel x86 or IA32 or IA64 instruction set architecture. It's challenging enough even for AMD.
Exceptions? Yes, there was a version of NT (3.something) that ran on the DEC ALPHA, but that was done by Microsoft themselves and it's long gone anyway. There were various Apple machines that could sort of run Windows in a hit and miss fashion (lots of things didn't really work) and now you can run Windows quite faithfully on the Intel-based MACS - but they're real Intel chips so it ought to work. Could somebody have written an Intel x86 or IA32 or IA64 emulator on S/370 or S/390 or z? Well yeah. But it's a huge amount of work and at the end of the day, why would you bother? If such a thing ever HAD been done at IBM, Amdahl (or anywhere else) as Ed suggested, it would be a skunk-works effort for sure. And I'd bet you a donut it wouldn't work worth spit anyway. CC ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
