>Tom Ponsford wrote:
> Paul Koning wrote:
> A Pro 350 will most likely be cheaper than a equivalant 11/23+. A Pro 380
> although it is an 11/73, is quite a bit slower thatn a real micro 11/73, but
> is also cheaper.
Jerome Fine replies:
It may also depend on how many PRO380 systems are still
around as opposed to PDP-11/73 systems. I often found
PDP-11/73 systems available for tossing up to about 5 years
ago.
> >The bus architecture is completely unrelated to that of any other PDP11, and ugly/messy/baroque/bogus at that.
> It does however, offer bitmap graphics, that is usually unavailable for most
> pdp's. or you can run it from the serial (maintainace port) (lol)
Why DEC did not make this feature generally available
is not clear. Probably the competition from the PC was
not sufficient until after around 1989 when the 486 became
available. By that time, DEC was already attempting to
kill the PDP-11 in general and RT-11 in particular, or so
it seems from what DEC was doing. V05.05 was released
in October 1989. V05.06 was released in August 1992
WITHOUT being fully Y2K compliant.
> Good luck trying to find the RT-11 version for the DEC Pro series!!
As far as I can see, all RT-11 distributions starting with
V05.01 in 1984 can run on the DEC PRO series. They
use the monitor RT11PI.SYS and device drivers DW.SYS
and DZ.SYS plus PI.SYS must also be present. Of
course, booting an RX50 floppy requires that the user
set up the boot blocks as well, usually not on a PRO.
The command would be:
COPY/BOOT:DZ DU0:RT11PI.SYS DU0:
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
--
If you attempted to send a reply and the original e-mail
address has been discontinued due a high volume of junk
e-mail, then the semi-permanent e-mail address can be
obtained by replacing the four characters preceding the
'at' with the four digits of the current year.
Received on Thu Apr 15 2004 - 22:10:25 BST