Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site ius2.cs.cmu.edu.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!dual!lll-crg!seismo!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!ius2.cs.cmu.edu!ralphw From: ralphw@ius2.cs.cmu.edu.ARPA (Ralph Hyre) Newsgroups: net.works Subject: Re: info on CMU 3M Machine Message-ID: <208@ius2.cs.cmu.edu.ARPA> Date: Thu, 3-Oct-85 15:16:06 EDT Article-I.D.: ius2.208 Posted: Thu Oct 3 15:16:06 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 6-Oct-85 05:45:41 EDT References: <3749@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> <73@unc.unc.UUCP> Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI Lines: 30 As far as I can tell, CMU is going to let the marketplace develop a good 3M machine, and any machine Next, Inc. will probably be a contender. (Any ideas on whether Jobs will build his 'Next' machines with an open bus architecture?) Right now the ITC is using Suns and MicroVaxes, and we're all waiting to find out whether IBM will require everybody on campus to sign non-disclosure agreements in order to be allowed to use their advanced workstation. MIT's project Athena is using mostly DEC hardware, (MicroVaxes, 750's with VS-1000 graphics terminals). They're supporting the CMU window manager calls as well as their own. (This will be a big win, especially if the compatibility is extended to other components of the systems. Unfortunately MIT's idea is to provide remote services through a remote procedure call (rpc) interface, while CMU is using sockets. Both systems use Berkeley 4.2 Unix.) I hope the '3M' idea isn't viewed as the ultimate solution, since everyone know that an open architecture is a requirement to keep up with the state of the art. -- - Ralph Internet: ralphw@c.cs.cmu.edu (cmu-cs-c.arpa) Usenet: ralphw@mit-eddie.uucp Fidonet: Ralph Hyre at Fido#385 (Pitt-Bull) -- - Ralph Internet: ralphw@c.cs.cmu.edu (cmu-cs-c.arpa) Usenet: ralphw@mit-eddie.uucp Fidonet: Ralph Hyre at Fido#385 (Pitt-Bull) Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com