Subject: Re: Slightly Off-Topic...
To: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
From: Vance Dereksen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/25/2001 19:10:23
But the first VAXen weren't microprocceor based.
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> [ On Monday, June 25, 2001 at 13:40:52 (-0400), Dave McGuire wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: Slightly Off-Topic...
> > Good lord, the 6502? I actually like to have some REGISTERS in my
> > processors, thank you. ;)
> What do you mean? Thera are 256 ready to use! (They just happen to
> reside in RAM... :-)
> > Yes, but those were some WEIRD designs.
> What do you mean, exactly? The WE32000 almost *is* a VAX (done right ;-)!
> The NS16032 and NS32032 are very much like a VAX too, at least
> architecturally. The NS guys claimed a much tighter instruction set,
> and their MMU is probably better in sime respects.... They certainly
> seemed to run faster than a MicroVAX at the same clock speed ! ;-)
> > > Of course they all paid homage back to the VAX....
> > ...which is newer than most of the processors that we discussed
> > above, strangely enough.
> Well, as far as I know the VAX is not not newer than the WE32000, and
> it's definitely newer than the NS16000 (1983). The first VAXen shipped
> in 1978. The 4004, 6502, 1802, and 8085 are the only ones mentioned so
> far that are older, and they're all less than 16 bits so not even
> vaguely on-topic for unix types.... :-)
> Greg A. Woods
> +1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>