Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!pdn!tscs!tct!chip From: chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: IBM RISC Message-ID: <25E29D78.3F9D@tct.uucp> Date: 21 Feb 90 13:54:00 GMT References: <9376@portia.Stanford.EDU> Organization: ComDev/TCT, Sarasota, FL Lines: 29 According to underdog@portia.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe): >[Will a hypothetical new RISC architecture from Sun] incorporate all the >old instructions from the SPARC to maintain compatibility...? > >If the answer is "no" (we don't incorporate upward compatibility), >then Sun LOSES. The new Sun competitor against the IBM 6000 >won't have ANY software adantage, which would be crucial in >the highly competitive marketplace. Not so. The advantage is source compatibility and the unity of OS environments across architectures. Sun already supports three architectures with SunOS (Intel, Moto, Sparc); adding a fourth wouldn't be much of a stretch. Then again, SunOS may be more of a liability than an asset. (No smiley.) >I still think that if the IBM 6000's specs are as good as >they appear, then certain RISC workstation manufacturers >will have some sleepless nights. Right you are. We've been thinking about using Suns around here, but things are looking good for a move to the 6000 instead. I still remember Henry Spencer's comment: "It is well-known that Sun's quality assurance department consists of a single clerk with an IQ of 37 equipped with a rubber stamp marked 'PASSED.'" It can't be a cooincidence that 90% of all messages in the security mailing list are about SunOS security holes... -- Chip Salzenberg at ComDev/TCT , "The Usenet, in a very real sense, does not exist."