Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!auspex!guy
From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: ACE (Was Re: Will NeXT survive?  Grow with the times?)
Message-ID: <7558@auspex.auspex.com>
Date: 1 May 91 21:15:24 GMT
References: <1991Apr30.191117.4373@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> <32459@usc> <1991May01.024228.9685@kithrup.COM>
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Lines: 46

>>This is the first real information I have read about ACE
>>machines.  Hmmm, Q2-92: sounds ambitious to me considering we
>>start with no chip, no OS, etc.
>
>There is an OS (although it's for the R3000 right now),

Well, several OSes.

There's Portable OS/2; does that run yet on any MIPS R-series-based
machine?

There's the new flavor of UNIX, which sounds as if it's going to be an
OSF/1-based system, with an SCO label on it (although there are some
disturbing statements from SCO about picking up some things from the
OSF/1 kernel; I sincerely hope that the new UNIX isn't something with
selected bits of OSF/1's kernel in it, but is either fully
S5R4-compatible or fully OSF/1-compatbile - no third force, please,
we're finally starting to nuke various off-brand UNIXes, I don't want
more popping up).  OSF/1, I think, runs on a MIPS-based DECstation.

There's also S5R4, for which MIPS ports exist; I think they finally
announced the MIPS ABI for S5R4.  Dunno which, if any, ACE members will
offer it.

>>If so,
>>will they have binary compatibility between machines which boot 
>>a MS-DOS and those which boot Unix?  
>
>SoftPC, I am sure.

If "binary compatibility" means "ability to run DOS programs".  As far
as I know, however, the ACE MIPS-based machines *won't* boot "a MS-DOS";
they'll boot Portable OS/2.  What kind of binary compatibility is being
spoken of here, given that?  I assume an ACE machine will be able to
boot *either* OS/2 *or* UNIX with no hardware changes, just installing a
different OS on the hard disk.  Whether the UNIX will be able to run
OS/2 binaries, or whether the OS/2 will be able to run binaries, I don't
know.

>All of the above is based on rumours and comments I've picked up from about
>8 or 9 different places, and, while I believe it's true, I have no
>affiliation with any of the companies involved, so I could be completely
>off-base.

Ditto for my comments, although isn't SCO involved?  Or are you no
longer affiliated with SCO?