craig@ncrcpx.UUCP (R. Craig Peterson) (08/18/87)
I'm considering the purchase of an 80386 system to do development (actually porting) of software. I currently have software that has been running on 68020's for a while and am going to start working on bringing it over to the IBM/PC MSDOS envionment, as well as various types of UNIXes. I understand that SCO has an 80386 C compiler that will generate machine code for the 8086, and 80286 machines for either the MSDOS or XENIX environments. Xenix also sounds like it is the most used version of UNIX for PC's. I can get Wyse PC's for a reasonable price, and have been thinking about getting one of their 386-based boxes. Will it run SCO Xenix? Has anyone used one that could relate their experiences? Would I do better to try and go with another machine, such as a Compact (sp?)? Any general help/suggestions would be appreciated. -- R. Craig Peterson "Don't speak unkindly of the Gods... ihnp4!ncr-sd!ncrlnk! You never know when one may be listening!" ncrcam!ncrcpx!craig O'Hara N8INO
rich@etn-rad.UUCP (Rich Pettit) (08/20/87)
In article <133@ncrcpx.UUCP> craig@ncrcpx.UUCP (R. Craig Peterson) writes: > >I'm considering the purchase of an 80386 system to do development >... IBM/PC MSDOS ... XENIX ... Wyse PC's (The 80386 is a nice processor. The machines that it is being put into is a crime. There is currently no '386 machine available that is worth spending non-company money on. If there was, I'd buy it.) 1) I have had SCO Xenix V running on a Wyse 386 buggy with 1Mb RAM 2) I wouldn't recommend it for what you're suggesting. 3) a) The best development environment for this machine would be to run one of the UNIX/DOS-in-one environments. (Why ?) b) Because, they allow you to run MS-DOS programs from the UNIX shell. Therefore, you could put together a System V makefile and specify the use of the MS-DOS C compiler (MSC, TCC, whathaveyou). You would never have to grit your teeth with COMMAND.COM. c) Then, after the compile is done, either run it from the UNIX shell, or bring up the pseudo-PC and run it from COMMAND.COM. 4) Get one of these systems from: a) Interactive Systems, Inc. Santa Monica, CA Their product is called VP/ix. This is a joint effort between Interactive and Phoenix. I seem to like this system the best. (opinion) (you have to be a VAR, OEM, or whatever, Joe Smith can't buy Q1 from IS). b) Microport Systems, Inc. Scotts Valley, CA Their product is called DOSMerge. This is a joint effort between Microport and Locus Computing. This system has some REAL nice features. c) Brand X vendors that are so small I never bothered looking at their product and they came into the game too late into my research project anyway. (Yes, I do this for a living). (So get to the point, Rich) Ok, if my arm was twisted behind my back right now and I had to make a decision......hmmmmm.... (long pause).... I'd get the MT386 from: Scientific Storage Technology One Butterfield Park, Spofford, NH 03462 (800) 255-0125 or (603) 363-4564 It has: 2 Mb RAM, 2 8 bit slots, 5 16 bit slots, 1 32 bit slot (filled with memory) Samsung Amber monitor, monochrome graphics card, 80Mb Seagate 28ms hard disk, 1.2M/360K floppy --- $2995. And they claim compatibility with the Compaq 386. My problem is that I've never heard of these people, and if you want to expand memory, you have to sell the 2Mb board and buy a 4Mb or 8Mb board, and you have to pay for it ahead of time, and they have to ship it from New Hampshire. Lots of bad vibes there. My second choice is definitely the Wyse. It's more expensive, but more standard, flexible, I've used the machine, they are close, I can pick it up with my car, etc. This is why I still don't have a '386 machine. (See first line of article). I hope you find yourself more decisive than I am. -- Richard L. Pettit, Jr. Software Engineer IR&D Eaton Inc., IMSD 31717 La Tienda Dr. Box 5009 MS #208 Westlake Village, CA 91359 { ihnp4,voder,trwrb,scgvaxd,jplgodo }!wlbr!etn-rad!rich
markg@amdcad.AMD.COM (Mark Gorlinsky) (08/24/87)
If you can wait awhile (say a few months) then there would be a solution
to your problem (ie. whether or not to buy a 386 based PC).
CHIPs has announced a 16Mhz set of their famous gate arrays. It uses AMDs
16 Mhz iAPX 80286-16. This is the same microprocessor as Intels 12.5Mhz,
only faster.
Compared to a 16Mhz 80386 based PC, the AMD 80286-16 with the CHIPs chip set,
actually runs faster. You should start to see mother boards and systems
with the 16 Mhz part in them within a few months.
One thing to consider is the price to performance index!
--
Mark Gorlinsky - AMD Processor Products Division/APPS SQA
UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,allegra}!amdcad!markg or amdcad!markg@decwrl.dec.com
AT&T: (408) 982-7811
DISCLAIMER: What's mine is mine, not my employers. agnew@trwrc.UUCP (R.A. Agnew) (08/26/87)
In article <256@etn-rad.UUCP> rich@etn-rad.UUCP (Rich Pettit) writes: >In article <133@ncrcpx.UUCP> craig@ncrcpx.UUCP (R. Craig Peterson) writes: >> >>I'm considering the purchase of an 80386 system to do development >>... IBM/PC MSDOS ... XENIX ... Wyse PC's > >(The 80386 is a nice processor. >There is currently no '386 machine available that is worth >spending non-company money on. If there was, I'd buy it.) > Have you checked out the MPE/386 from Bell Technologies?
gp@picuxa.UUCP (Greg Pasquariello X1190) (09/09/87)
>I'm considering the purchase of an 80386 system to do development >.. IBM/PC MSDOS ... XENIX ... Wyse PC's > >(The 80386 is a nice processor. >There is currently no '386 machine available that is worth >spending non-company money on. If there was, I'd buy it.) Now that it has been officially announced, check out the AT&T 6386 PC. Super machine. Will run DOS and/or UNIX (yes, that's an "and/or". It will run both simultaneously.) It is a super machine.
jay@splut.UUCP (Jay Maynard) (09/11/87)
In article <297@picuxa.UUCP>, gp@picuxa.UUCP (Greg Pasquariello X1190) writes: > >I'm considering the purchase of an 80386 system to do development > >.. IBM/PC MSDOS ... XENIX ... Wyse PC's > > Now that it has been officially announced, check out the AT&T 6386 > PC. Super machine. Will run DOS and/or UNIX (yes, that's an "and/or". It > will run both simultaneously.) It is a super machine. Yeah, but how compatible is it? Considering the list of things that won't work quite right on a 6300, I hope AT&T (Olivetti?) did a better job of engineering this time around. I've lost track of the things that wouldn't quite work on AT&Ts. I thought the 6300+ would run DOS and/or Unix? -- Jay Maynard, K5ZC...>splut!< | uucp: {hoptoad!academ!uhnix1}!splut!jay Never call malice that which | {sun!housun!nuchat,seismo!soma!academ!uhnix1} can be explained by stupidity. | GEnie: JAYMAYNARD/CI$: 71036,1603/K5ZC@WB5BBW The opinions herein are shared by neither of my cats, much less anyone else.
allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon Allbery) (09/12/87)
As quoted from <297@picuxa.UUCP> by gp@picuxa.UUCP (Greg Pasquariello X1190): +--------------- | >I'm considering the purchase of an 80386 system to do development | >There is currently no '386 machine available that is worth | >spending non-company money on. If there was, I'd buy it.) | | Now that it has been officially announced, check out the AT&T 6386 | PC. Super machine. Will run DOS and/or UNIX (yes, that's an "and/or". It | will run both simultaneously.) It is a super machine. +--------------- If you're after a UNIX system (not DOS, at least not yet), take a look at the Altos 386 Series 2000. It's a sweet little hummer... Note that Altos has been building Intel-based UNIX systems for a long time, and they do a good job of making even old 8086s run real multiuser OSes. Who needs OS/2? -- Brandon S. Allbery, moderator of comp.sources.misc {{harvard,mit-eddie}!necntc,well!hoptoad,sun!mandrill!hal}!ncoast!allbery ARPA: necntc!ncoast!allbery@harvard.harvard.edu Fido: 157/502 MCI: BALLBERY <<ncoast Public Access UNIX: +1 216 781 6201 24hrs. 300/1200/2400 baud>> All opinions in this message are random characters produced when my cat jumped (-: up onto the keyboard of my PC. :-)
mlm@homxc.UUCP (M.MILLIMAN) (09/14/87)
> AT&T (Olivetti?) did a better job of engineering this time around. I've lost > track of the things that wouldn't quite work on AT&Ts. > > I thought the 6300+ would run DOS and/or Unix? I have used my AT&T PC6300 for over two years running MS-DOS applications and various versions of MS-DOS and have not encountered any in compatibility problems with commercial software. I use Mosaic's Twin, MSC 4.0, MS-Word 3.0, MASM 3.0, MS-Pascal, MS-FORTRAN, Sidekick, etc. and all of these products work fine. MS-Word takes advantage of the higher resolution screen of the 6300. Micro-Emacs works like a gem. I have had some difficulty with a couple PD programs but most work on the 6300 or have specific versions for this machine. If you have a list of incompatible programs I would like to see it so I can avoid them. I chose this machine for my personal use over the wide variety of other machines. My employer had no influence in my decision. Yes, I too am curious about the 6386 WGS. I have a marketing leaflet about it and it sounds interesting. If someone gets one of these machines, I would like to hear how it performs. Mark L. Milliman UUCP: {ihnp4,rutgers,thumper}!hocad!mlm AT&T Bell Laboratories Internet: mlm%hocad.uucp@att.com Holmdel, New Jersey 07733 (201)949-3745
waynec@hpsrlc.HP.COM (Wayne Cannon) (09/14/87)
Has anyone any experience with the Tandy 4000? Currently the Tandy and Wyse machines both appear attractive. Wyse says that they will support both the 287 and 387 coprocessors, while Tandy supports only the 287. Both support true zero wait-state RAM access via a two-plane memory interleave over the entire 32-bit memory space while some competitors achieve their memory speed only via memory caching in a smaller high-speed memory (cost savings?!) and run the bulk of their 32-bit RAM at a slower pace.
doug@edge.UUCP (Doug Pardee) (09/14/87)
> Considering the list of things that won't work quite right on a 6300, I hope > AT&T (Olivetti?) did a better job of engineering this time around. Just being picky here: AT&T sells 'em. Olivetti builds 'em. Corona Data Systems designed it. -- Doug Pardee, Edge Computer; ihnp4!oliveb!edge!doug, seismo!ism780c!edge!doug
enchant@oliveb.UUCP (Dan Crocker) (09/15/87)
In article <135@splut.UUCP>, jay@splut.UUCP (Jay Maynard) writes: > Considering the list of things that won't work quite right on a 6300, I hope > AT&T (Olivetti?) did a better job of engineering this time around. I've lost > track of the things that wouldn't quite work on AT&Ts. Don't confuse the 6300 and the 6300+. The 6300 was designed by Olivetti and is billed as an XT compatible. The 6300+ was designed by AT&T. It is a 286 based machine but is not an AT compatible. AT&T's 6310 is an AT compatible. If you are truly talking about the 6300, then I am very surprised to hear that it is so incompatible. I have never seen any problems here. dan -- Here comes the supernatural anesthetist If he wants you to snuff it All he has to do is puff it He's such a fine dancer
kai@ihlpa.ATT.COM (Irwin) (09/16/87)
In article <943@edge.UUCP>, doug@edge.UUCP (Doug Pardee) writes: > > Considering the list of things that won't work quite right on a 6300, I hope > > AT&T (Olivetti?) did a better job of engineering this time around. > > Just being picky here: > AT&T sells 'em. > Olivetti builds 'em. > Corona Data Systems designed it. > -- > Doug Pardee, Edge Computer; ihnp4!oliveb!edge!doug, seismo!ism780c!edge!doug Just being a little more picky here: AT&T owns 25% of Olivetti (50% is owned by Italian government, so its a controlling share of the publicly held stock) An ex-Olivetti executive runs the Computer Systems Division of AT&T And Corona Data Systems had NOTHING to do with the 6300 (M24) it was designed by Olivetti ATC in Cupertino CA! The Olivetti M18 (never sold by AT&T) was Designed by Corona - I have one of each! And just for the record the 6300+ Motherboard was designed by AT&T Information Systems, Manufactured (but never sold) by Olivetti To the original poster: what doesn't run? the only things I've found that don't run are packages that do direct screen writes and run only on MDA! There were incompatability problems with 1.0 BIOS, but with 1.21 or above, I've yet to see a program that will run on an IBM XT & AT, and not a 6300! I've seen plenty of packages that will NOT run on an IBM AT, Tandy, Zenith! The 6300 is as compatable a clone as any in its "stock" form (I do have a DEB which does have compatability problems with some irrelivent packages, but "as delivered" is the issue). Treated as an XT compatable (except for 8086 (same as original deskpro)) the 6300 does everything an XT compatable is supposed too! Ken A. Irwin AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville IHP 1A332 (312) 416-4485 ...!ihlpa!kai
george@mnetor.UUCP (09/17/87)
In article <3320054@hpsrlc.HP.COM> waynec@hpsrlc.HP.COM (Wayne Cannon) writes: >Has anyone any experience with the Tandy 4000? Currently the Tandy and >Wyse machines both appear attractive. Wyse says that they will support >both the 287 and 387 coprocessors, while Tandy supports only the 287. I haven't heard about a 386 product from Wyse before although I'm not surprised. We have their 286 box here in the office and are extremely pleased with it. What are the spec's on the 386 box? -- Regards, George Hart, Computer X Canada Ltd. UUCP: utzoo >!mnetor!george seismo BELL: (416)475-8980
cc743810@sjuvax.UUCP (09/17/87)
In article <5501@ihlpa.ATT.COM> kai@ihlpa.ATT.COM (Irwin) writes:
+ To the original poster: what doesn't run? the only things I've found
+ that don't run are packages that do direct screen writes and
+ run only on MDA! There were incompatability problems with 1.0
+ BIOS, but with 1.21 or above, I've yet to see a program that
+ will run on an IBM XT & AT, and not a 6300! I've seen plenty
+ of packages that will NOT run on an IBM AT, Tandy, Zenith!
What WON'T run on an AT&T 6300(+)?
How about IBM's 5250 Emulation Adapter (Latest release)?
Also, Intel Aboveboard/PC's won't work with the 6300(+).
I've personally verified this, using AT&T 6300+ machines, ROM v 2.08B or
something like that. An AT&T techie told me that the Aboveboard SHOULD
work, but Intel says that 'Installation in a AT&T 6300 machine is not supported.
Feh.
Chuck
+ davidsen@steinmetz.UUCP (09/17/87)
In article <3320054@hpsrlc.HP.COM> waynec@hpsrlc.HP.COM (Wayne Cannon) writes: |Has anyone any experience with the Tandy 4000? Currently the Tandy and |Wyse machines both appear attractive. Wyse says that they will support |both the 287 and 387 coprocessors, while Tandy supports only the 287. It's good to have the choice. While the 387 delivers more performance, it may be desirable to have a boost at lower cost. The 387 is about twice as costly as the 287, and seems to deliver about four times the performance (from published figures, don't flame me). |Both support true zero wait-state RAM access via a two-plane memory |interleave over the entire 32-bit memory space while some competitors |achieve their memory speed only via memory caching in a smaller |high-speed memory (cost savings?!) and run the bulk of their 32-bit RAM |at a slower pace. This is a more complex topic than you imply. The cost savings is in not using cache. The 45ns static memory used in most caches makes the manufacturer's cost for a 1MB machine about the same. The addition of caching logic probably makes it cost more (the new Intel cache controller may change that). However, unless you use real static memory for main memory, the cache is a win. If you use 16 bit memory to save money, the performance hit is 40% without cache, 15% with (that *is* my measurement). The cache gives about 18-22% improvement for 100ns 1MB chips (my measurement). Note that Compaq has added cache to their new motherboard with the 387 on it. I suspect that cache with interleaved memory will become the most cost effective method as speeds increase. When I bought my PC Designs machine I got some benchmarks from friends at COMDEX, who found it was 20% faster than the (original) Compaq386. At some point I will want to get a revised motherboard with a 20MHz 386 and 387, but I am pretty happy for now. Hope this clarifies the tradeoffs involved. I'm looking at getting a VESTA 386, and will let you know what results I have if I buy it. I want to run a BBS on it, using VAT, but doubt that their serial drivers are strong enough. -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
gpw@ihdev.ATT.COM (G. P. Wilkin) (09/22/87)
RE: ABOVE BOARD..... and the 6300 Plus Why try to make a card designed for a slow pc(that's 1 or more wait states, at the bus, not just the motherboard) and make it work in a machine which no wait states. There are cards which work fine under these conditions. I don't believe the Above Board would work in some of the faster 286 machines(10,12MHZ) either. A whole bunch of software does not work as planned on the plus, but I must repeat Paul's statement, MY 6300 WORKS FINE! -- George Wilkin AT&T Network Systems, Naperville, IL !ihnp4!ihdev!gpw IH 4A-157 work 312-979-4317
kai@ihlpa.ATT.COM (Irwin) (09/22/87)
In article <865@sjuvax.UUCP>, cc743810@sjuvax.UUCP writes: > > What WON'T run on an AT&T 6300(+)? > > How about IBM's 5250 Emulation Adapter (Latest release)? > > Also, Intel Aboveboard/PC's won't work with the 6300(+). > > > I've personally verified this, using AT&T 6300+ machines, ROM v 2.08B or > something like that. An AT&T techie told me that the Aboveboard SHOULD > work, but Intel says that 'Installation in a AT&T 6300 machine is not supported. > > Feh. > > Chuck > + the original question was on software compatability not hardware, but anyway it took us three trys to find an AT that would work with the 5250 there is an a lot of hardware this board doesn't like to work with! and it DOES do direct screen writes! And just to pop your balloon a little further, a quote from intel propaganda sheet "true compatables such as compaq deskpro , AT&T 6300..." this is a foot note to the Intel Aboveboards reguarding the "true compatables" supported! Ken A. Irwin AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville IHP 1A332 (312) 416-4485 ...!ihlpa!kai
crs@cpsc6b.UUCP (09/25/87)
In article <865@sjuvax.UUCP>, cc743810@sjuvax.UUCP writes: < In article <5501@ihlpa.ATT.COM> kai@ihlpa.ATT.COM (Irwin) writes: < + To the original poster: what doesn't run? the only things I've found < + that don't run are packages that do direct screen writes and < + run only on MDA! There were incompatability problems with 1.0 Even 'direct screen write' programs work fine with 1.21 or later ROM BIOS. < + BIOS, but with 1.21 or above, I've yet to see a program that < + will run on an IBM XT & AT, and not a 6300! I've seen plenty < + of packages that will NOT run on an IBM AT, Tandy, Zenith! < < < What WON'T run on an AT&T 6300(+)? ^^^ < < How about IBM's 5250 Emulation Adapter (Latest release)? < < Also, Intel Aboveboard/PC's won't work with the 6300(+). ^^^ < < < I've personally verified this, using AT&T 6300+ machines, ROM v 2.08B or ^ < something like that. An AT&T techie told me that the Aboveboard SHOULD < work, but Intel says [...] < < Feh. < < Chuck Again we see someone confusing some incompatibilty problems from the 6300 PLUS with the 6300. I have seen an Intel AboveBoard work just fine in a 6300 (I *DON'T* know whether it would work in a 6300 PLUS), but that still has *nothing* to do with the compatibility of the 6386 to anything else. As far as 80386 machines goes, the 6386 is the most versatile around. (Or, it will be, next month ;-)). Disclaimer: Disclaimer? I don't need no steenking disclaimer! -- Chris Seaman | o\ /o crs@cpsc6a.att.com <or> | || See "Attack of the Killer Smiley"! ..!ihnp4!cpsc6a!crs | \vvvvvv/ Coming Soon to a newsgroup near you! | \____/
Tom_Hodges@busker (Tom Hodges) (12/27/87)
RE WYSE computers. Before buying a Wyse, ask a lot of questions. The ones we have seen have only 640K main boards on the 80286's. Don't know if they do this with the 80386's or not. Standard computers have at least 1 meg on the mother board. Our advice - compare the setup to some other brands. I think Wyse's tend to be a bit pricey! --- * Origin: Busker's Opus (Opus 1:105/14) SEEN-BY: 105/14 -- Originated at: UUCP : ...!tektronix!reed!busker!nev (busker==105/14) FidoNet : 105/14 (Busker's Opus (503)771-4773)
howardl@wb3ffv.UUCP (Howard Leadmon ) (01/15/88)
In article <2.21E0FF27@busker>, Tom_Hodges@busker (Tom Hodges) writes: > > RE WYSE computers. Before buying a Wyse, ask a lot of questions. The > ones we have seen have only 640K main boards on the 80286's. Don't > know if they do this with the 80386's or not. Standard computers have > at least 1 meg on the mother board. Our advice - compare the setup to > some other brands. I think Wyse's tend to be a bit pricey! > After seeing this on the net I felt it was only fair to post my personal opinion in return. I am the proud owner of a WYSE Model 3216-01 16Mhz 80386 based system, and I don't regret the purchase one bit. First let me point out that all of the new WYSE product line (80286 and 80386) has the ability to hold 1meg on the mother board, and only the lowest priced 80286 machine has 512K installed. Now on the 80386 (the one I have), it comes with 1meg on the memory card, and has room to add an additional meg of RAM bringing the total to 2meg. The thing about the WYSE that sold me is the NEW modular design that they started using. What I mean by modular is that the CPU is now on a plug-in card. So if you buy an 8mhz 80286 and decide you want a 12mhz machine, you just replace the card. Also if you had on of the 80286 and wanted to upgrade to an 80386, again all you have to do is buy the 80386 CPU card. The 80386 WYSE uses somthing called a TOP PLANE BUS, which as it implies, the 32bit bus runs along the top. This also takes away the one or two 32bit slot limitation, since all you do is strech the buss across the top of the machine. I have been running one of theese systems since it first came avalible, and I am very happy with the machine. Also when I needed to get an updated 80386 to run UNIX 386 on the system (The 16bit 80386 bug :-) WYSE shipped me a new CPU by Federal Express. So take it for what it is worth, I personally wouldn't give it up for anything (well almost:-)..... Sincearly, Howard Leadmon cp1!sarin!wb3ffv!howardl (301)-335-2206