On Jun 6, 21:43, ajp166 wrote:
> From: Pete Turnbull <pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com>
> What part of what I wrote is unclear? The comment is most 11/53s I've
> seen contained 11/23B cpus. that maybe "not as shipped" but very
> commonplace.
>
> >office use. When it was announced (1987), it was as a J11 processor
> with
> >separate I&D space and RAM on the processor card -- which no 11/23 has.
> I
> >never heard of one having an 11/23 as shipped by DEC.
>
>
> Never said it was. I said many early 11/53boxen HAD 11/23s not they
> shipped
> with 11/23s. Seems they were fertile ground for modified systems.
It read as if you were saying an 11/53 could have a M8189. Of course a box
can have a particular label, but have some other CPU in it - I have a few
like that. But a box labeled 11/53 and having an 11/23 procssor in it is
an 11/23, not an 11/53. It won't run RSX-11M or Ultrix configured for an
11/53, or various things.
I'm surprised you say it's common. I can see that in a few cases the
processor might be removed to use elsewhere, but how many systems end up
with a 5-years-older processor in them? In my experience, it's much more
common to see systems with later processors in them (though I'm thinking of
11/03 -> 11/23, 11/23 -> 11/73, 11/73 -> 11/83, microVAX -> microVAX-II
upgrades).
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
Received on Thu Jun 07 2001 - 02:13:01 BST