ajp166 wrote:
>
> From: Neil Cherry <ncherry_at_home.net>
>
> >Most VAX are mini's (at least in my Opinion). I'm not sure exactly what
> >decides that a machine is a Main frame, a mini and a micro (yes I know
> >most desktops are micro's).
>
> A MicrovaxII in a BA32 is a mini. I VAX6440 is a super mini. VAX9000
> certainly qualifies as MAINFRAME.
>
> The '80s blurred mini/mainframe and VAX and AS400 type machines
> were doing their best to foster that. The VAX (11/780!) was originally
> called a superminicomputer. Then again a 8250 with a disk farm was
> anything but mini.
I agree, that's why I tipped toed through that mine field and said "Most
VAX are mini's". I think the medium sized VAX's were the big sellers,
weren't they? I would guess that the VAX 3100's and 4000's would be called
workstations even though they were more powerful that their predacessors.
It's the Unix boxen that confuse me the most, I supported the 3B2 line
of AT&T computers and they had the 3B1 (desktop/workstation/micro computer)
the 3B2 (micro/mini's), the 3B5/3B15 (mini), 3B20 Simplex/Duplex (main
frame?), and the 3b2/4000 (main frame? [4 3B2/1000's in parallel]).
Now to even throw a smaller wrench into the works, I worked with OS9 and
a Gimix Ghost. It had 2 meg of RAM, an 80 M MFM drive, 12 serial ports,
2 printer ports and a video interface (which we didn't use). This box
used a 6809 as it core processor, although every 4 serial ports had
a 6809 to handle buffering and skid (flow) control. I loved that box
and wish I had it now.
--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry_at_home.net
http://members.home.net/ncherry (Text only)
http://meltingpot.fortunecity.com/lightsey/52 (Graphics)
http://linuxha.sourceforge.net/ (SourceForge)
Received on Thu Dec 14 2000 - 21:26:38 GMT