tsych@pyrthoth.pyramid.com (Terry Sych @ Pyramid Technology Corp.) (04/11/91)
from San Jose (CA) Mercury News (Bits & Bytes) 4/10/91: "... the company is doing something concrete to build up its sales. A Next source said company engineers are hard at work on the new Next machine, which will be based on Motorola's yet unannounced 88110 RISC microprocessor. The good news is the new computer will be a screamer in the $8,000 to $10,000 range. The bad news: Software written for the current Nexts won't run on the new one, since they use another Motorola microprocessor family. A simplified software conversion program is planned, however." --Terry
torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) (04/11/91)
tsych@pyrthoth.pyramid.com (Terry Sych @ Pyramid Technology Corp.) writes: >from San Jose (CA) Mercury News (Bits & Bytes) 4/10/91: >sales. A Next source said company engineers are hard at work >on the new Next machine, which will be based on Motorola's >yet unannounced 88110 RISC microprocessor. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Formally unannounced, but very strongly hinted at... >is the new computer will be a screamer in the $8,000 to >$10,000 range. Educational price $5000?? I'll buy one! -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Evan Torrie. Stanford University, Class of 199? torrie@cs.stanford.edu "If it weren't for your gumboots, where would you be? You'd be in the hospital, or in-firm-ary..." F. Dagg
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/11/91)
In article <151480@pyramid.pyramid.com> tsych@pyrthoth.pyramid.com (Terry Sych @ Pyramid Technology Corp.) writes:
from San Jose (CA) Mercury News (Bits & Bytes) 4/10/91:
"... the company is doing something concrete to build up its
sales. A Next source said company engineers are hard at work
on the new Next machine, which will be based on Motorola's
yet unannounced 88110 RISC microprocessor. The good news
is the new computer will be a screamer in the $8,000 to
$10,000 range. The bad news: Software written for the
current Nexts won't run on the new one, since they use another
Motorola microprocessor family. A simplified software
conversion program is planned, however."
What is the chip in the new Data General Aviions? Moto. has made some
grandiose claims about what they are going to do with the Motorola
line, but that is a couple of years down the road. I hope NeXT is
getting a good deal because MIPSs processors are better. They give
the performance results that they claim.
-Miketorrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) (04/11/91)
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >In article <151480@pyramid.pyramid.com> tsych@pyrthoth.pyramid.com (Terry Sych @ Pyramid Technology Corp.) writes: >What is the chip in the new Data General Aviions? The same 88100 as it's always been, but with new 88204 Cache MMUs [they have 64K of cache on-chip vs 16K in the plain 88200]. Motorola made a semi-announcement of their plans for the 88110 [superscalar/out of order execution etc/3-5x speed of 88100] at last year's Hot Chips. I doubt they'll get them out before the beginning of '92 though [and if the 040 is anything to go by, don't expect them even then]. >Moto. has made some >grandiose claims about what they are going to do with the Motorola >line, but that is a couple of years down the road. I hope NeXT is >getting a good deal because MIPSs processors are better. They give >the performance results that they claim. True, the MIPS R4000 would probably be just as good a chip as the 88110. However, don't judge the 88K by Data General's Aviions. There are other 88K machines which do get much closer to what Motorola claims [e.g. Harris NightHawk]. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Evan Torrie. Stanford University, Class of 199? torrie@cs.stanford.edu Fame, fame, fame... What's it good for? Ab-so-lute-ly nothing
oneill@fornax.UUCP (Richard Oneill) (04/12/91)
In article <151480@pyramid.pyramid.com>, tsych@pyrthoth.pyramid.com (terry sych @ pyramid technology corp.) writes: >from san jose (ca) mercury news (bits & bytes) 4/10/91: > >[...] a next source said company engineers are hard at work >on the new next machine, which will be based on motorola's >yet unannounced 88110 risc microprocessor. i'm probably opening a can of worms here, but anyone care to comment on the ramifications of this decision. not with regard to *what* risc processor they have chosen, but just the fact that they are going to be changing processor architecture at all. does this mean that anyone buying a 68040 next today is buying something that will very soon be obsolete. in my department we will soon be throwing out sun3's because aparrently sun isn't keen on supporting them any more. is this going to happen with next and, if so, after how long. what about software? are software houses going to be keen on shipping two versions of their products for the next, one for the 68k, one for 88k. thoughts anyone ? Richard. -- Composing a suitably apt and witty .signature is left | oneill@fornax.UUCP as an exercise for the reader. | oneill@cs.sfu.ca
amanda@visix.com (Amanda Walker) (04/12/91)
torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes: >yet unannounced 88110 RISC microprocessor. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Formally unannounced, but very strongly hinted at... That's a real strong hint, then. I picked up a data sheet at Motorola's booth at Uniforum... :) -- Amanda Walker amanda@visix.com Visix Software Inc. ...!uunet!visix!amanda -- "Work FOR? I don't work FOR anybody! I'm just having fun." --Dr. Who
gumby@Cygnus.COM (David V. Wallace) (04/12/91)
Date: 11 Apr 91 17:29:06 GMT From: oneill@fornax.UUCP (Richard Oneill) In article <151480@pyramid.pyramid.com>, tsych@pyrthoth.pyramid.com (terry sych @ pyramid technology corp.) writes: >from san jose (ca) mercury news (bits & bytes) 4/10/91: > >[...] a next source said company engineers are hard at work >on the new next machine, which will be based on motorola's >yet unannounced 88110 risc microprocessor. i'm probably opening a can of worms here, but anyone care to comment on the ramifications of this decision. not with regard to *what* risc processor they have chosen, but just the fact that they are going to be changing processor architecture at all. NeXT has in the past played its cards close to its chest -- this is the first time I've seen "a next source" quoted in an article. The NYT thing, on the other hand, claimed that it was a Moto source who told them NeXT had chosen the 88K. Is that because NeXT chose the 88K or because NeXT, while investigating what chip to use next, talk to Moto? Speculating is fun (I do some below) but I wouldn't lay my money on anything without hearing it from NeXT. does this mean that anyone buying a 68040 next today is buying something that will very soon be obsolete. in my department we will soon be throwing out sun3's because aparrently sun isn't keen on supporting them any more. is this going to happen with next and, if so, after how long. For folks with source I doubt it will be an issue for a while. After all, the next compiler is the GNU compiler which can be retargetted to a variety of machines. And as far as the 88K goes, it turns out that you could make a tool which would convert 68K binaries into 88K binaries (as long as they ran completely in user space). This is hard to do in general; it's just due to certain architectural similarities that you can get away with it in this particular combination. Who knows about performance though...
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (04/12/91)
In article <GUMBY.91Apr12060409@Cygnus.COM> gumby@Cygnus.COM (David V. Wallace) writes:
And as far as the 88K goes, it turns out that you could make a tool
which would convert 68K binaries into 88K binaries (as long as they
ran completely in user space). This is hard to do in general; it's
just due to certain architectural similarities that you can get away
with it in this particular combination. Who knows about performance
though...
Call me crazy, but I don't think developers should have too many
problems just recompiling their programs. The word alignment is the
only one that springs to mind, assuming that they have written their
programs in Objective C and not assembler.
-Mikesonger@orchestra.ecn.purdue.edu (Christopher M Songer) (04/12/91)
So if they go to another architecture, is it as simple as just recompiling? What about the .nib files IB produces. I've heard them touted as a small executable taged onto the beginning of your program, are 68K nib files going to work with an IB for 88K? -Chris
scott@mcs-server.gac.edu (Scott Hess) (04/13/91)
In article <2473@fornax.UUCP> oneill@fornax.UUCP (Richard Oneill) writes: In article <151480@pyramid.pyramid.com>, tsych@pyrthoth.pyramid.com (terry sych @ pyramid technology corp.) writes: >from san jose (ca) mercury news (bits & bytes) 4/10/91: > >[...] a next source said company engineers are hard at work >on the new next machine, which will be based on motorola's >yet unannounced 88110 risc microprocessor. i'm probably opening a can of worms here, but anyone care to comment on the ramifications of this decision. not with regard to *what* risc processor they have chosen, but just the fact that they are going to be changing processor architecture at all. First, consider the time-frame we are talking about here - realistically, the processor has not even been truly announced, yet (or so they're saying), meaning that any machine based on it is probably 18 to 24 months out. By that time, there had darn well better be at least one more generate of NeXT out there - else, I'm very worried for the market. That one, of course, will be a 68040, probably running faster, maybe with more graphics support - but basically the same machine we all know and love. But, obsolesence? What do we want? When my mother was asking me if I'd really make good use of the machine I bought, or would I have stopped using it within 9 months (like the previous machine I bought - an Apple II, if you must know), my answer was that I'd be surprised if I even have the same machine by then - I'll probably have already upgraded. It depends on what you want the machine to do, I guess. If you want to do secretarial work on it, well, there will be enough 68000-based machines out there before a RISC machine gets out to make it well worth publishers time to support it. Beyond any differences in cost between the RISC machines and the CISC machines. But, seriously, there will certainly be another processor after the next one used, be it CISC or RISC. The 68000 class of machines is over ten years old, and though it's not a bad architecture, it can't hurt to open some windows and let in some fresh air. After all, ten years is about 12 hardware generations or so . . . I'd bet that any RISC machine NeXT comes out with is going to be a prime opportunity for them to recoup some of the profit margins they are missing now - after all, you've gotta charge more for the fast machine than you do for the slow one, else no one'll buy the slow one! So, don't expect the 88110 (was that the right number) based NeXT, should it ever exist, to cost $3300 educational pricing . . . rather, it will cost $8000, while the 40Mhz '040 version that's sold in the same time-frame will probably be $3000 . . . In a more global sense, I think that a port of NextStep, by NeXT, to any non-68000 architecture is a great leap forward. With two architectures under their belt, the third would be quite a bit simpler (unless the first two were extrememly similar). That would mean that NextStep could start to propagate to other machines, which is a Good Thing. For NeXT to really succeed, I think they need to interoperate well with DEC machines, Sun machines, and other established workstation vendors - what better way than to actually be running NextStep on them? I have no doubts about whether NeXT is working with some of the RISC hardware out there. The only thing that remains to be seen is What, When, and How Much . . . Later, -- scott hess scott@gac.edu Independent NeXT Developer GAC Undergrad <I still speak for nobody> "Simply press Control-right-Shift while click-dragging the mouse . . ." "I smoke the nose Lucifer . . . Banana, banana."
pfkeb@ebnextk.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Paul Kunz) (04/13/91)
NextStep 1.0 .nib files produced on '030 NeXT are readable, editable, and otherwise completely compatible with NextStep 1.0 on an IBM RS/6000 under AIX. Thus, if the byte order is the same (big endian), NextStep compiled on other machines should not have trouble with .nib files. On the other hand, once a .nib file has been edited by NextStep 2.0, its not longer usuable for NextStep 1.0 machine, be it '030, '040, or RS/6000. Such is the price for progress, i.e. the really neat new features in 2.0. .nib files do not contain executable code, as I understand it (someone correct me if I'm wrong), rather they are imbedded in your executable code so that the Application object in each application can read it and reproduce the objects you dragged into your application with the Interface Builder.
gumby@Cygnus.COM (David V. Wallace) (04/13/91)
Date: 12 Apr 91 14:40:00 GMT From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) Call me crazy, but I don't think developers should have too many problems just recompiling their programs. Believe me it's a severe hassle since you have to rebuild everything, run it through your QA, change your documentation and price list, get your support folks to know about the change (since people will ask new questions about it, even if the hackers know it's the same). All this is easier for little companies than for big ones. The converter I mentioned would be some sort of stopgap users could use though; I wasn't anticipating that companies would use it and ship the product that way!
edwardj@microsoft.UUCP (Edward JUNG) (04/14/91)
The 88110 has been announced by Motorola. The latest Data General Aviion workstations use this newest incarnation of the 88k RISC architecture. These machines were introduced a few months ago, and according to InfoWorld, started shipping last month. Specifications are available from Motorola. -- Edward Jung Microsoft Corp. My opinions do not reflect any policy of my employer.
shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) (04/15/91)
scott@mcs-server.gac.edu (Scott Hess) writes: >First, consider the time-frame we are talking about here - realistically, >the processor has not even been truly announced, yet (or so they're >saying), meaning that any machine based on it is probably 18 to 24 >months out. By that time, there had darn well better be at least one >more generate of NeXT out there - else, I'm very worried for the market. This isn't necessarily the case. Given the upward compatibility of the 88000 and 88100, announcement and delivery could follow in short order. As an analogy, industry observers expect product announcements to *accompany* Intel's release of the first 486SX. >But, seriously, there will certainly be another processor after the >next one used, be it CISC or RISC. The 68000 class of machines is >over ten years old, and though it's not a bad architecture, it >can't hurt to open some windows and let in some fresh air. After >all, ten years is about 12 hardware generations or so . . . This line of thinking could, as well, argue that the internal combustion engine is dated because it's 100+ years old. >I'd bet that any RISC machine NeXT comes out with is going to be a >prime opportunity for them to recoup some of the profit margins they >are missing now - after all, you've gotta charge more for the fast >machine than you do for the slow one, else no one'll buy the slow >one! So, don't expect the 88110 (was that the right number) based >NeXT, should it ever exist, to cost $3300 educational pricing . . . >rather, it will cost $8000, while the 40Mhz '040 version that's sold >in the same time-frame will probably be $3000 . . . Now we're in the realm of sheer speculation and wishful thinking. Some of us have better things to do with our time. ----------- uunet!media!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake shwake@rsxtech
robertl@bucsf.bu.edu (Robert La Ferla) (04/15/91)
> In a more global sense, I think that a port of NextStep, by NeXT, to > any non-68000 architecture is a great leap forward. With two > architectures under their belt, the third would be quite a bit > simpler (unless the first two were extrememly similar). That would > mean that NextStep could start to propagate to other machines, > which is a Good Thing. For NeXT to really succeed, I think they need > to interoperate well with DEC machines, Sun machines, and other > established workstation vendors - what better way than to actually > be running NextStep on them? NeXTStep 1.0 has been running on the IBM RS/6000 for quite some time. A while back, Paul Kunz posted a message about his application "Reason" running on an IBM RS/6000 Model 550 at 53 MIPS and 23 MFLOPS. The RS/6000 is a RISC architecture. Robert La Ferla Lotus Development Corporation Advanced Technology Group / Improv
kan@bugs-bunny.rtp.dg.com (Victor Kan) (04/16/91)
>>>>> On 14 Apr 91 01:25:36 GMT, edwardj@microsoft.UUCP (Edward JUNG) said: Edward> The 88110 has been announced by Motorola. I don't know about this. Edward> The latest Data General Edward> Aviion workstations use this newest incarnation of the 88k RISC Edward> architecture. Really? I guess I should ask my boss to replace my AV310c 88100 workstation with one of those 88110 workstations. :-) Seriously, the recently announced AViiON 7000 and 8000 quadprocessor servers still use the 88100 cpu, but do use the new 64Kb cache/MMU chips. -- | Victor Kan | I speak only for myself. | *** | Data General Corporation | Edo emacibus, ergo sum. | **** | 62 T.W. Alexander Drive | Columbia Lions Win, 8 October 1988 for | **** %%%% | RTP, NC 27709 | a record of 1-44. Way to go, Lions! | *** %%%