Xref: utzoo comp.sys.att:2226 comp.sys.ibm.pc:10839
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!ucbcad!pasteur!ucbvax!cbosgd!mandrill!neoucom!wtm
From: wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: 6300 graphics and EGA cards
Message-ID: <950@neoucom.UUCP>
Date: 17 Jan 88 16:19:02 GMT
References: <1037@bakerst.UUCP> <801@ur-tut.UUCP> <938@neoucom.UUCP> <2827@homxc.UUCP>
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Lines: 24
Keywords: 6300, EGA, graphics, equivalents
Summary: Sorry if I got the name wrong...

In article <2827@homxc.UUCP>, rps@homxc.UUCP (R.SHARPLES) writes:
> In article <938@neoucom.UUCP>, wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes:
> > 
> > Just got done disassembling a Worksation 86, or whatever it is
> 				^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 	What is this, a new PC?  What do you mean by "Unix port"?


My apologies if I got the name of the machine wrong.  It is
whatever the most recent AT&T 80386-based computer is called.
I belive the AT&T '386 product has been written about in such
places as Infoworld.

As far as the Unix on the machine goes:  I don't know if it still
considered a beta release -- possibly.  I have read some articles
in the computer trade rags that AT&T had contracted out to one of
any number of houses [which house depends on which rag you read] to
perform the porting of Unix to the 80386.  I guess that I mean "Unix
Port" in the sense that somebody or more likely bodies had to do the
work of getting Ssys V running on the '386 taking full advantage of
the '386s features, rather than just pretending the '386 is a '286.
The [MS] DOS-merge facility was not available at the time I looked
the machine over.  We couldn't do to much with the 630 termianl, as
a dmdcc compiler was unavailable.  The 630 did run multiple
sessions quite effectively, though.