From: YODERS@PRIME.WITTENBERG.EDU (Kevin Yoders)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.prime
Subject: Re: 50series
Date: 24 Jul 92 20:50:12 GMT
Reply-To: Info-Prime@Blx-A.Prime.COM

> In article <9207241650.AA17763@usenet.rpi.edu> you write:
> >Douglas Rand writes:
> >> Probably nothing.  Truthfully, there is nothing remarkable and many
> >> things deplorable in the 50 series architecture,  especially from the
> >> view of byte languages like C.  Other machines implement protection
> >> rings (386, 486, PA-RISC) and could support a gated OS.  Most current
> >> architectures support IEEE FP (a good thing) and have reasonable
> >> VM models.

Speaking of OS's, has anybody considered that Primos could be ported
to another architecture?  I am sad to see the 50-series go.  It is a
nice machine that is incredibly reliable.  Our uptime probably
exceeds 99% (though we don't actually keep track of it.  It has only
been down once in the last 12 months that wasn't scheduled, and that
was due to a power failure).  What saddens me even more is the loss
of Primos.  Yes, it has its problems.  Most of them (for our shop,
anyway) are in the class of "nuisance".  Compared to other OS's I
have had to deal with, Primos is a gem.  Is there any chance at all
of seeing a re-vitalized (perhaps POSIX-compliant?) version of Primos
running on one of the machines mentioned above?

> >What Douglas seems to miss is the fact that however deplorable the 50 series
> >architecture may or may not be, it runs and runs *very* well.  It does it's
> >job.  We average 99.8% uptime across 15 of machines -- year after year.
> >I want our business to run and could care less about byte languages.
                                                        --------------

Say what?  You don't write everything in C++?  How ever do you get
anything to work at all?  (pardon the sarcasm.  those that are
offended by it, tough luck.  you deserve it.  I apologize to
everybody else).

> >As far as a market,I have a $20 million investment in software which will take
> >a long time and a LOT of money to convert to anything else.  I will need
> >to provide more horsepower for an ever increasing demand for cycles for
> >several years even if the monies could be found for hardware purchases and
> >software conversions.  I'm sure that if the game is still distributed
> >processing by the time funding can be found and plans laid, then
> ...
> >Mike O'Rear.  Usual & standard disclaimers. I am me, USC is USC.

Looks like I'm not the only one who will miss it (after we actually
get around to shutting it off, that is).  The premature death of any
viable machine is bad news for the industry in general.  The
50-series, while not brand-spanking-new-full-of-trendy-buzzwords, was
certainly viable in today's market. Without the added burden of
financial troubles (not entirely their own fault) and overjealous
doom-sayers preventing machines from being sold, that is.

I knew once the media got a hold of it, the 50-series was doomed.  It
seemed like a self-fulfilling prophesy.  Prime has some trouble, the
media says they are going under, customers adopt a wait-and-see
strategy, Prime loses more sales and has more trouble, etc.

But I am ranting.

Kevin Yoders

The opinions expressed here are my own and not those of any other
agency (though many people agree with me).

PS.  Why don't we start another Primos-vs-Unix war?  Or a
C-vs-every_other_language war?  This list has been rather dull
lately.  I'll gladly fire the first round.