Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mailrus!ncar!ames!amdcad!sun!sun-bb!khb From: khb@chiba.kbierman@sun.com (Keith Bierman - SPD Advanced Languages) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Next computer Message-ID: Date: 8 Feb 90 00:03:46 GMT References: <8859@portia.Stanford.EDU< <7341@pdn.paradyne.com> Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM Distribution: usa Organization: Sun Microsystems Lines: 29 In-reply-to: bbc@sicilia.rice.edu's message of 7 Feb 90 21:42:13 GMT In article bbc@sicilia.rice.edu (Benjamin Chase) writes: [Pushing this thread back towards comp.arch fodder] Nice move :> I thought the NeXT architecture, and its choice of O/S, was designed to eventually adapt to multiple processors (no, I don't mean the DSP, you boneheads, I already know about that :-). Any opinions on this? Other PC and workstation class machines are slowly appearing with multiple processors. Any totally unsubstantiated rumors about the NeXT that someone would care to spew on the net? :-) Mach was certainly designed to aide and abet distribution of work over a network (which may very well live in one box, employ shared memory and other nifty stuff). Seems to me that one should probably build a bang up uniprocessor first .... but I've been wrong before (and will be again, no doubt). -- Keith H. Bierman |*My thoughts are my own. !! kbierman@Eng.Sun.COM It's Not My Fault | MTS --Only my work belongs to Sun* kbierman%eng@sun.com I Voted for Bill & | Advanced Languages/Floating Point Group Opus | "When the going gets Weird .. the Weird turn PRO" "There is NO defense against the attack of the KILLER MICROS!" Eugene Brooks