On 2016-02-16 16:54, [email protected] wrote:
On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 08:58:11 -0500
Clem Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
As for what started this thread. I think it is interesting that the long
term successful architectures in the market did have a excellent
compatibility stories. IBM with system 360 certainly set a high bar, and
DEC has nothing to be ashamed of, the different DEC lines, particularly
the Vax, did a great job here. In truth, probably the best of pure
compatibility story has to be Intel.
No offense, but to even suggest Intel has the best compatibility or that
pure and Intel go together in the same sentence is completely over the top.
From every angle I can see, Intel has about the worst track record of
upward or backward compatibility and the least amount of design integrity
or purity of any vendor still in business and probably in the history of
modern computing.
[...]
I think you need to keep the OS and the processor separate in this
discussion.
As far as I'm aware, you can still boot an old version of MS-DOS on the
latest x86-64 based PC you can grab. However, that demands not only that
the CPU is backwards compatible (it is), but that you also have a BIOS
that is compatible, since MS-DOS depends on that.
But there is no point ranting about the upgrades and enhancements to the
CPU not being backward compatible. That would never be expected. The
crucial question is if you can boot that old OS, and run your old
programs. And the answer to that one is, I believe, yes.
Johnny
_______________________________________________
Simh mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
