zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean) (01/18/91)
In Article <37826@cup.portal.com>, thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes: >Veddy, veddy inneresting. It DEFINITELY appears there's a huge, untapped >market for low-priced and reliable UNIX systems. I wonder if AT&T's gonna >be sorry they dropped the 3B1/UNIXPC/PC7300 because it seems that NOW is the >time they should be selling them. I'm now getting 5-10 phone calls a DAY from >people asking where they can buy these systems. Of course, if the 7300/3B1 wasn't an orphan, it wouldn't necessarily be low-priced. Are there *any* 68010-based Unix systems still in production? I once asked the net why people didn't make little daughter-boards to replace a 68000 with a 68010+MMU, and use them to make useable computers out of all those cheap 68000 boxes. People kept saying "why not just use a 68030 instead?" Fine, if you've got money to burn, but some of us don't... ================== zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean) {harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod
forrie@morwyn.UUCP (Forrie Aldrich) (01/26/91)
| Of course, if the 7300/3B1 wasn't an orphan, it wouldn't | necessarily be low-priced. Are there *any* 68010-based Unix | systems still in production? | | I once asked the net why people didn't make little | daughter-boards to replace a 68000 with a 68010+MMU, and use them | to make useable computers out of all those cheap 68000 boxes. | People kept saying "why not just use a 68030 instead?" Fine, if | you've got money to burn, but some of us don't... Yes it would be NICE if someone could figure out a way to use the 68030 on the UNIX-PC... believe me, it would be incredible. But unfortunately, I think it's impossible at this point. As doing such would require all new hardware (mostly) AND I believe a new KERNEL --- who's gonna write it? Because of different address space, and all that complicated stuff. BUT if someone DOES it, let ME know! :-) Forrie -- --------------------=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-------------------- Forrest Aldrich, Jr.| ...uunet!zinn!eci!morwyn!forrie |forrie@morywn.UUCP | <EMAIL/UUCP PATHS> | CREATIVE CONNECTIONS| ...uunet!unhd!unhtel!morwyn!forrie |Graphic Illustration ------------------\-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-/------------------ \____ PO Box 1541 - Dover, NH 03820 ___/
thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) (01/27/91)
forrie@morwyn.UUCP (Forrie Aldrich) in <42@morwyn.UUCP> writes:
Yes it would be NICE if someone could figure out a way to use the
68030 on the UNIX-PC... believe me, it would be incredible. But
unfortunately, I think it's impossible at this point. As doing such
would require all new hardware (mostly) AND I believe a new
KERNEL --- who's gonna write it? Because of different address space,
and all that complicated stuff. BUT if someone DOES it, let ME know!
Welllll, a number of companies mfg. 68020/68881 daughterboards that plug in
directly to a 68000 or 68010 socket. That trend started about 6 years ago
when Motorola wanted to upgrade their 68000/68010 trainers, and has since been
expanded to upgrading Amigas, Macs, and other 68000-family machines.
The Amiga automatically identifies a 68000, 68010, 68020, 68030 or 68040 and
thus has NO problems with any CPU in the 680x0 family (i.e. part of the CPU ID
interrogation includes adjusting its kernel for stack frame differences and
cognizance of special modes of the other chips during its boot procedure).
The only software problems on the Amiga (with other CPU chips) concerns brain
damaged games from Europe with their hideous self-modifying-code copy
protection (which screws the data and instruction caches on 68020, 68030 and
68040 processors).
I plugged one of the Amiga cards into the 3B1 and it worked for all of a few
milliseconds; I suspect the problem was due to the stack frame on interrupts.
In a Motorola Application Note it is claimed to require just a few hours to
"fix" any kernel to handle the different CPU. HOWEVER, this requires kernel
source (or a DAMN GOOD disassembler and a willingness to experiment).
Note also the daughterboards (that I've seen) will not permit the top-level
metal cover (the floppy/HD/power-supply plate) to be closed, so a tower-like
case with abundant room seems a necccessity. Hmmmm, now that I have one 3B1
in a tower case with external monitor, hmmm .... :-)
Thad Floryan [ thad@cup.portal.com ]shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) (01/30/91)
forrie@morwyn.UUCP (Forrie Aldrich) writes: >Yes it would be NICE if someone could figure out a way to use the >68030 on the UNIX-PC... believe me, it would be incredible. But >unfortunately, I think it's impossible at this point. As doing such >would require all new hardware (mostly) AND I believe a new >KERNEL --- who's gonna write it? Well, as it happens, a successor to the UNIX-PC has already made its appearance. Based on the 680x0, innovative windowing, standard monitor and mouse. And they offer more in the way of performance and software at a lower list price than the original UNIX-PC price. Doesn't have an integral modem though. Oh yeah... it's called the NeXT.
murphyn@motcid.UUCP (Neal P. Murphy) (02/02/91)
shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) writes: ... > Well, as it happens, a successor to the UNIX-PC has already made >its appearance. Based on the 680x0, innovative windowing, standard monitor >and mouse. And they offer more in the way of performance and software at >a lower list price than the original UNIX-PC price. Doesn't have an >integral modem though. Oh yeah... it's called the NeXT. Well, NeXT uses BSD-flavor, which I really don't care for. The NeXT also is barely any faster than the UnixPC. The NeXT '030 can get downright sluggish at times, and the '040, while significantly faster, still is not blindingly quick. Personally, I'd rather have an 88100-based system. A 25MHz 88100 is 8-10 times faster than a 25MHz 68030. We've got both here in a lab; some simple observations have been: 68030 88100 Ehternet (FTP) 50kB/s (at best) 200kB/s (at best) SCSI streaming tape starts & stops a lot mostly streams typical command response time 1 sec after <RETURN> AT <RETURN> (sometimes I think it finishes the command BEFORE I hit the return key!) NPN
jkinz@mony815.uucp (Jeff Kinz) (02/02/91)
In article <233@raysnec.UUCP> shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) writes: >forrie@morwyn.UUCP (Forrie Aldrich) writes: > >>Yes it would be NICE if someone could figure out a way to use the >>68030 on the UNIX-PC... believe me, it would be incredible. But >>unfortunately, I think it's impossible at this point. As doing such >>would require all new hardware (mostly) AND I believe a new >>KERNEL --- who's gonna write it? > > Well, as it happens, a successor to the UNIX-PC has already made >its appearance. Based on the 680x0, innovative windowing, standard monitor >and mouse. And they offer more in the way of performance and software at >a lower list price than the original UNIX-PC price. Doesn't have an >integral modem though. Oh yeah... it's called the NeXT. And the Amiga 68030 box was on display at uniforum - SYSVR4 with what looked like a complete development environment. They are sending me price lists as this is written. I'll post if it looks interesting (has X windows and lots else included in basic package ) I think the initial retail price may be lower than NeXT. We'll see. :-) -- Jeff Kinz, on site at | UUCP: uupsi!vmp!monymsys!jkinz MONY Financial Services MD 75-14 | Domain: jkinz@monymsys.vmp.com Glenpointe Center West | Teaneck, NJ 07666-6888 | Phone: +1-201-907-6632
mhw@lock60.UUCP (Mark H. Weber) (02/02/91)
In article <6414@bone13.UUCP> murphyn@motcid.UUCP (Neal P. Murphy) writes: >shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) writes: >> Well, as it happens, a successor to the UNIX-PC has already made >>its appearance. Based on the 680x0, innovative windowing, standard monitor >>and mouse. And they offer more in the way of performance and software at >>a lower list price than the original UNIX-PC price. Doesn't have an >>integral modem though. Oh yeah... it's called the NeXT. > >Well, NeXT uses BSD-flavor, which I really don't care for. The NeXT also >is barely any faster than the UnixPC. The NeXT '030 can get downright >sluggish at times, and the '040, while significantly faster, still is not >blindingly quick. Actually, as Thad Floryan has reported, a more direct heir to the 3b1 may be the new Unisys 68040-based system. Built by the same group (Convergent Technologies) that built the 3b1, the new system will even run some 3b1 binaries. Note that I have directed follow-ups to the new comp.sys.3b1 group, which is a more appropriate place for this discussion. If you can't get comp.sys.3b1 (and comp.sources.3b1), complain to your news administrator. -- Mark H. Weber ( mhw@Schuylkill.Canal.Org ) "Schuylkill" (skool' kill) Mont Clare ( ...!uunet!cbmvax!cgh!lock60!mhw ) is a Dutch word meaning PA USA ( ...!psuvax1!burdvax!gvlv2!lock60!mhw ) "hidden river"