On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 22:56:22 GMT, "George Copeland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"David Debono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > >> They still exist and are being used, although not as much as before. >> What is interesting about TCP/IP as a way of communicating is that >> there are now many differing systems with a shared connectivity model. >> Heterogenous (sp?). hasn't made things any simpler as each has merits >> and disadvantages. Do you remember the original IBM 13 layer OSI >> model? > >It's funny, you are hitting all of my high points. *smile* > IBM came out with their >micro-channel PC architecture about 1993. It was far superior to even what >is being used today, had real plug-play and lots of other advantages. It >was also completely proprietary. Microsoft helped all of the hardware >manufacturers come up with their own architecture standard. This effort >virtually killed IBM's attempt to corner the market. I do not remember it exactly as that. MCA architecture was earlier than that IIRC. The system was no where near fool-proof with manufacturers having to pay to register their particular cards to get them certified. There was any number of problems with config discs for each card only having a specfic range of addresses, DMA etc and card clashes were frequent. Further if you did not have the disc then you could not install the cards leading many of us to make copies of the bloody things somewhere that we could get access to (a server share of some sort was favoured) if we had forgotten/lost/whatever the things. Again I am not so sure it was Microsoft that killed it off more than PCI which microsoft adopted as a way forward. True that PS2's were virtually bullet proof but relied on IB and Intel being in bed together. With the advent of other processors and cheaper PCI boards with faster subsystems IBM couldn't compete in the particular market. Again IIRC the move to RISC based RSxxxx systems still uses the technology? > >OSI, the nomenclature is slipping, Open Systems Interconnectivity, something >like that? Came out about 1988? If that is the thing, I remember it. Very >ambitious, was not adopted by industry, was the last major innovation IBM >tried before their big fall. I thought that they were toast, but Gerstner >brought them back from the dead. The man deserves a Nobel prize. The OSI model is still used extensively but the seven layer model. Interestingly enough TCP/IP drops between layer two and three, maybe IBM got it right in the first place? Certainly they lost out by waiting for 802.5 to be fully ratified before releasing Token passing networking. People had already gone for Ethernet 802.3 *before* the ratification which also rather put an end to Banyan Vines, Starlan and the others. Cheaper to inplement as well, only passive Cat 2 cabling instead of active components. I would have thought an avenue of research would be the almost total uptake of Cat 5 cabling as against the AT&T or Type 1 systems would be a more interesting effect. Telco's like BT, Banking systems Reuters and Bloomberg capitulated totally in the end but not without a struggle. > >Anyway, IBM invented client/server back around 1965 with their TSO products >and CICS. A lot of people forget that. > Again both are still being used, but as I've not used Mainframes in anger for a few years now but doesn't MVS/XA still support CICS as a virtual machine "on the bus"? Anyway take care as ever David D. The Mediaeval Combat Society The Historical Reenactment Web Site http://www.montacute.net/histrenact/welcome.htm
