lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
but by 1990 with microchannel c. things were much more closed off.
i thought only one company ever really made microchannel,
and even they weren't terribly in earnest in the end,
except on non-PC things like RS6000.
IBM tried to recover control over the PC market
lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
but by 1990 with microchannel c. things were much more closed off.
i thought only one company ever really made microchannel,
and even they weren't terribly in earnest in the end,
except on non-PC things like RS6000.
IBM tried to recover control over the PC
erik quanstrom wrote:
lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
but by 1990 with microchannel c. things were much more closed off.
i thought only one company ever really made microchannel,
and even they weren't terribly in earnest in the end,
except on non-PC things like RS6000.
IBM tried to recover
wikipedia agrees with lucio on this point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Channel_architecture#Marketshare_issues
The majority within IBM never wanted into that part of the market in the
first
place, as it was seen as cannibalizing not only 3XXX terminal sales, but the
entire, highly
lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
wikipedia agrees with lucio on this point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Channel_architecture#Marketshare_issues
The majority within IBM never wanted into that part of the market in the first
place, as it was seen as cannibalizing not only 3XXX terminal sales,
On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:24:47 +0200
Rodriguez Faszanatas rodri...@gmail.com wrote:
If you aren't trying to build a terminal, the marvell sheevaplug
works well
That is the point. My employer is interestet in a non-intel terminal.
And yeap you're right, the beagle isn't that nice.
I'm
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:15:59 +0800
W B Hacker w...@conducive.org wrote:
The only 'glue' needed was level-shifters - discrete transistors on my OSI
Challenger II, Motorola 1488 1489 diode-coupled-logic on everything up
until
the 16XXX derivative of the 8250 was sucked into a 'bridge'
Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:15:59 +0800
W B Hacker w...@conducive.org wrote:
The only 'glue' needed was level-shifters - discrete transistors on my OSI
Challenger II, Motorola 1488 1489 diode-coupled-logic on everything up until
the 16XXX derivative of the 8250 was
but writing
microcode for the Perkin-Elmer 3220 was fun and useful as well.
that's interesting. i found this paper and am studying it. are there
obvious advantages?
microcode for the Perkin-Elmer 3220 was fun and useful as well.
that's interesting. i found this paper and am studying it. are there
obvious advantages?
I think there were quite a few independent projects at different places
adding special-purpose instructions to accelerate particular
Thinking about it a bit more ... when systems become more and more
closed, as x86 systems are becoming now, the field of innovation is
reduced to what a single company can think of -- the monopoly
provider, so to speak.
When systems become more closed, you hear stuff like this: The
percentage of
Thinking about it a bit more ... when systems become more and more
closed, as x86 systems are becoming now, the field of innovation is
reduced to what a single company can think of -- the monopoly
provider, so to speak.
you're right nobody wants to do that is not a good argument.
but on the
but by 1990 with microchannel c. things were much more closed off.
i thought only one company ever really made microchannel,
and even they weren't terribly in earnest in the end,
except on non-PC things like RS6000.
On Thu Oct 8 16:43:50 EDT 2009, fors...@vitanuova.com wrote:
but by 1990 with microchannel c. things were much more closed off.
i thought only one company ever really made microchannel,
and even they weren't terribly in earnest in the end,
except on non-PC things like RS6000.
in the end,
I once worked for a telco who's exchanges where connected to their billing
machines
via a pair of IBM PS2 MCA machines, they also had one spare machine. I was
there in about
1997 and everyone very worried what might happen if they lost more than one of
these
machines.
The last I heard the
but by 1990 with microchannel c. things were much more closed off.
i thought only one company ever really made microchannel,
and even they weren't terribly in earnest in the end,
except on non-PC things like RS6000.
IBM tried to recover control over the PC market by introducing MCA,
If you aren't trying to build a terminal, the marvell sheevaplug
works well
That is the point. My employer is interestet in a non-intel terminal.
And yeap you're right, the beagle isn't that nice.
Just like you wouldn't have wanted to redo the microcode
in your Vax 11/750, even if you could have.
Speak for yourself. I don't know about the VAX, but writing
microcode for the Perkin-Elmer 3220 was fun and useful as well.
It was nicely integerated into Unix, so different processes
could
In article 13426df10910061432y17cf8632ta09af4ffe2153...@mail.gmail.com you
write:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Aharon Robbins arn...@skeeve.com wrote:
I understand all your points, and many of them are good ones. But there
really are places where you don't want to go, and into the chipset
yeap, done. is there someone actively working on a port to the beagleboard?
just to eliminate duplicate work. i found ron's ts7200 which is a nice
starting
point.
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 3:50 PM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.netwrote:
On Mon Oct 5 09:46:01 EDT 2009, rodri...@gmail.com
The beagleboard is somewhat painful. It has a cortex-a8 cpu,
which is quite a bit more complex than older arms. The lack of
built-in ethernet means that getting USB going is vital, but the
EHCI registers provoke access exceptions and the OTG registers
are like no USB interface we've ever seen
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:16 AM, W B Hacker w...@conducive.org wrote:
Anyone know if the AMD environment is any more 'open'?
way, way, more open. same with via. They regularly contribute chipset
source code to coreboot. That's my measure.
I hadn't paid much attention to the ARM until the
ron minnich wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:16 AM, W B Hacker w...@conducive.org wrote:
Anyone know if the AMD environment is any more 'open'?
way, way, more open. same with via. They regularly contribute chipset
source code to coreboot. That's my measure.
I hadn't paid much attention to
Varian Data, General Automation, SDS/XDS, DEC, Data General, Honeywell, CDC,
GE
I don't think DEC deserves this branding. In my experience they were
one of the most open hardware companies around. Back when they were still
DEC, of course.
--lyndon
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg - VE6BBM/VE7TFX
lyn...@orthanc.ca wrote:
I don't think DEC deserves this branding. In my experience they were
one of the most open hardware companies around. Back when they were still
DEC, of course.
You never dealt with Alpha maybe. The story
ron minnich wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg - VE6BBM/VE7TFX
lyn...@orthanc.ca wrote:
I don't think DEC deserves this branding. In my experience they were
one of the most open hardware companies around.
It was sad to watch the Alpha blow its early lead due to
In article 13426df10910061021g3b033abbia134769baee93...@mail.gmail.com you
write:
as bad as the ARM may be, it can't hold a candle to what the pentium has
become:
1. RISC CPU (undocumented) in the northbridge (MCH) running ThreadX
2. RISC CPU in the Ethernet part running ThreadX
3. Simple CPU in
Just like you wouldn't have wanted to redo the microcode
in your Vax 11/750, even if you could have.
i thought several universities did modify the microcode in various ways,
to test some research ideas, or just to improve things.
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Aharon Robbins arn...@skeeve.com wrote:
I understand all your points, and many of them are good ones. But there
really are places where you don't want to go, and into the chipset
is one of them.
Not really the case. People do want to go there, so they can do
Just like you wouldn't have wanted to redo the microcode
in your Vax 11/750, even if you could have.
i thought several universities did modify the microcode in various ways,
to test some research ideas, or just to improve things.
like this one
i thought several universities did modify the microcode in
various ways, to test some research ideas, or just to improve
things.
As I understand it, on the 750 floating-point errors were
accidentally traps instead of faults, or the other way
around. DEC said oops, well, we guess it's
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Dave Eckhardt davide...@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
For something nobody would want to do, there sure are a
lot of hits for pcs750.bin.
It's the difference between nobody would want to do it and we don't
want you do it ;-)
ron
ron minnich wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Dave Eckhardt davide...@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
For something nobody would want to do, there sure are a
lot of hits for pcs750.bin.
It's the difference between nobody would want to do it and we don't
want you do it ;-)
ron
To me, the 'meat' of
Trying to build /sys/src/libip for the arm today, I found that mk was dying.
/sys/include/ip.h:128 eipfmt.c:3 incomplete structure element: payload
Is this a known problem?
i think you need to update your compiler source code and rebuild.
5c builds all the libraries for me.
- erik
thanks erik,
i had to update the 5* sources by hand. pull thought they are up to date.
rod
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 3:16 PM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.netwrote:
Trying to build /sys/src/libip for the arm today, I found that mk was
dying.
/sys/include/ip.h:128 eipfmt.c:3 incomplete
On Mon Oct 5 09:46:01 EDT 2009, rodri...@gmail.com wrote:
thanks erik,
i had to update the 5* sources by hand. pull thought they are up to date.
rod
you may also wish to apply the patch i posted to make the
comma operator work.
- erik
36 matches
Mail list logo
