dave@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (David A Rasmussen) (09/20/87)
I suppose I shouldn't really post an article comparing apples and oranges
but while paging through Byte the other day I felt much like when I first
caught a glimpse of the amiga in pre-amiga days. I'm refering to the preview
of the Acorn Archimedes series.
The Model 310 they reviewed had 1 meg of ram, 1 3.5" 800k disk, detached
keyboard, 512k rom (including a basic interpreter), 640*512 with 256 of 4096
colors, 8 channel stereo sound, par:, ser:, mouse, comp out, rgb analog out.
programable video can produce 1024*1024 monochrome.
Their 300 series will allow a 2 slot module to be added. The 400's have 4 slots
and allow coprocessors. Both machines come with a proprietary risc processor.
The os (arthur) is not multitasking, although the editor allows background
compiles.
Benchmarks from the article are as follows:
BYTE BASIC Benchmarks in seconds:
write read sieve calculations
A310 15.8 15.6 7.9 3.2
Compaq deskpro 386 25.0 24.0 21.0 6.8
BYTE C Benchmarks in seconds
A310 386 MacSE with Hypercharger
Fib 52.4 53.1 71.6
Seive 5.7 6.0 14.9
Sort 10.0 5.6 20.6
Savage 91.2 21.5 8.8
Dhrystones per sec 4901 3748 2176
Acorn is owned by Olivetti, who is in cahoots with AT&T.
Yet another amiga-like machine possibly coming out... looks interesting to me.
Dave Rasmussen c/o Computing Services Division @ U of WI - Milwaukee
Internet: dave@csd1.milw.wisc.edu Uucp: uwvax!uwmcsd1!dave {o,o}
Csnet: dave%uwmcsd1@uwm Bellnet: +1 (414) 229-5133 \u/
ICBM: 43 4 58 N/ 87 55 52 W Usnail: 3200 N Cramer #E380, Milw WI 53211peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) (09/25/87)
In article <2901@uwmcsd1.UUCP>, dave@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (David A Rasmussen) writes: > The os (arthur) is not multitasking, although the editor allows background > compiles. Another Atari ST or Mac competitor, then. If the O/S isn't multitasking it's not in the same market as the Amiga. I bought this machine because I couldn't afford a Sun, not because I wanted a pocket Cray. -- -- Peter da Silva `-_-' ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter -- 'U` Have you hugged your wolf today? -- Disclaimer: These aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.
sid@chinet.UUCP (Sid Grange) (09/27/87)
In article <812@sugar.UUCP> peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: >In article <2901@uwmcsd1.UUCP>, dave@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (David A Rasmussen) writes: >> The os (arthur) is not multitasking, although the editor allows background >> compiles. > >Another Atari ST or Mac competitor, then. If the O/S isn't multitasking it's >not in the same market as the Amiga. I bought this machine because I couldn't >afford a Sun, not because I wanted a pocket Cray. In the Byte article describing the machine, they say it has the capability for VM and demand paging. The particular chip was called the MEMF chip, and, as they put it, "..it translates between logical and physical addresses to give a 32-megabyte logical address space. It provides memory protection with 3 levels of access privilege: supervisor mode, operating system mode, and user mode." As was stated, the proprietary system doesn't multitask, but this machines *seems* to have a reasonable potential for running real Unix, where the Amiga does not (I've had one, and know it's problems, so let's not debate it :-). Plus the machine appears to be over four times faster than an Amiga or ST. On the other hand, it may never reach the U.S. -- Sid Grange sid@chinet ihnp4!chinet!sid
jmh@eagle.UUCP (09/29/87)
Summary: Expires: Sender: Followup-To: In article <1630@chinet.UUCP> sid@chinet.UUCP (Sid Grange) writes: > > [... multitasking with the Acorn Archimedes ...] > >In the Byte article describing the machine, they say it has the capability >for VM and demand paging..... >... As was stated, the proprietary system doesn't >multitask, but this machines *seems* to have a reasonable potential for >running real Unix ... A potted background. As many of you will know, Acorn are the company behind the BBC Micro, a successful family of 6502-based micros (well, successful over here). Two models under the Archimedes flag have been introduced so far, the 300 and 400. The 300 has been blessed with the BBC tag, the 400 is sold as an Acorn machine ; both models are similar, but the 400 includes hardware FPU option, co-processor bus, HDC and greater RAM capacity. The current OS, Arthur, is very similar to the OS on the BBC range. It is not multitasking. Facts. Acorn have been developing their own Unix look-alike (ARX) at their California R&D site. They have hinted at an Archimedes model 500 running said ARX, targeted at the engineering/workstation market. Now some speculation. Believe this at your peril - it may well be a load of dingos' kidneys. Arthur was produced to satisfy the 'I want a fast Beeb' market. For the rest of us, ARX in some form or other will appear on the 400, which is currently selling at the 1500 quid level. Acorn will neither confirm or deny this - their salesthings are under threat of castration if they even talk about it. My guess is that, having produced Arthur, their development effort is currently directed at getting Unix running. They certainly don't seem too bothered about the future direction of Arthur ; it seems Arthur is capable of multitasking, but the windowing system isn't. Acorn haven't got round to deciding whether to rectify this in a later release. I'm hoping for an Arch 400 running ARX in the foreseeable future. By which time I might even be able to afford one. Usual disclaimers/trademarks. BBC, it seems, is not an international trademark of the British Broadcasting Corporation, but it is to that august institution I refer. -- Jim Hague UUCP: ..!mcvax!ukc!jmh Failure has gone to his TG: 72:MAG10135 head. - Wilson Mizner.
peter@sugar.UUCP (10/02/87)
In article <1630@chinet.UUCP>, sid@chinet.UUCP (Sid Grange) writes: > As was stated, the proprietary system doesn't > multitask, but this machines *seems* to have a reasonable potential for > running real Unix, where the Amiga does not (I've had one, and know it's > problems, so let's not debate it :-). No argument. But, funny as it may seem, I don't want to run a third party operating system... even UNIX. I'm sure you're as aware as I am of the resounding success of such products (let's see... UNIX on the PDP-11 is a hit in certain technical markets, but that's about it). I want to be able to sell any programs I come up with. Right now the Amiga is the only machine with an acceptable native O/S aimed at the home market. I mean, if I wanted to run UNIX an IBM-PC/AT is much cheaper. > Plus the machine appears to be over > four times faster than an Amiga or ST. True, and a palpable hit. But then, the 68020 improves the Amiga's speed by a factor of at least 3 for CPU-intensive computation. Disk-intensive stuff is going to be I/O bound anyway. > On the other hand, it may never reach > the U.S. Sigh. Anyone remember the Torch XXX? I lusted in my heart for that one. What the Amiga/Mac/ST should have been. -- -- Peter da Silva `-_-' ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter -- Disclaimer: These U aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.