Xref: utzoo comp.sys.dec:972 comp.arch:7981
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!steinmetz!davidsen
From: davidsen@steinmetz.ge.com (William E. Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec,comp.arch
Subject: Re: DECstation 3100 info. (LSB standard)
Message-ID: <13010@steinmetz.ge.com>
Date: 23 Jan 89 17:50:48 GMT
References: <2932@imagen.UUCP>
Reply-To: davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen)
Organization: General Electric CRD, Schenectady, NY
Lines: 26

In article <2932@imagen.UUCP> keith@imagen.COM (Keith Rich) writes:

| [ I wrote ]
| :  Those of us who work with a number of vendors would be delighted to
| :have an LSB standard. Those damn PC won't go away, so machines like the
| :VAX give fewer "learning opportunities" than any other byte order
| :machines.
	[ my sig deleted ]

| I get a kick out of the above logic.  I suppose that this means that the PC
| which was released in 1981 was the reason for the LSB standard being adopted
| for the Vax which was released in 1977.  What does this mean in terms of the
| PDP-11 which was released in 1970?  And why didn't the PDP-10 follow this
| LSB standard?

What brought that on? I not only didn't mean that, I never said it. What
I said was that people who work in a multi-vendor environment like LSB
in their large machines because some programs have been written for the
PC which port well into VAXen and the like.

Yes I know you can write programs which will run on anything, but unless
you want to write everything yourself, you use what you get.
-- 
	bill davidsen		(wedu@ge-crd.arpa)
  {uunet | philabs}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me