Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!yetti!geac!daveb
From: daveb@geac.UUCP (Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: The 360 was a design landmark  (360 vs vax)
Message-ID: <1222@geac.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Aug-87 09:09:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: geac.1222
Posted: Tue Aug 25 09:09:45 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Aug-87 02:36:35 EDT
References: <855@tjalk.cs.vu.nl> <2683@hoptoad.uucp>
Reply-To: daveb@geac.UUCP (Dave Collier-Brown)
Organization: The little blue rock next to that twinkly star.
Lines: 21

In article <418@astroatc.UUCP> johnw@astroatc.UUCP (John F. Wardale) writes:
>The 360 designers saw fit (or did they just get luckie...I don't
>think so!) to design *PIPELINING-CAPABILITY* into the 360... 
[other discussion of VAX vs 360] 
>(And I'm definataly a non-IBM type person!)

One of the other thing they (and the rest of the BUNCH) did with
their machines was ensure that there was a definite "radial" appearance
to the components instead of stringing them out on a bus.  It is
probably unfair to compare a Vax (Virtual Address eXtended '11) with
a mainframe for this reason.
  Now if DEC chose to mount the Vax order code and some fast memory in
a re-tooled '10 cabinet, we might be able to compare these particular
apples and oranges.

 --dave
-- 
 David Collier-Brown.                 {mnetor|yetti|utgpu}!geac!daveb
 Geac Computers International Inc.,   |  Computer Science loses its
 350 Steelcase Road,Markham, Ontario, |  memory (if not its mind)
 CANADA, L3R 1B3 (416) 475-0525 x3279 |  every 6 months.