Talk:IBM System/38

message: It's rather flattering, certainly, but not 'over the top'.  As a former IBM employee, I can testify that the System/38 represented an outstanding advance in technology for the time.  Importantly, these advances were available in a machine that you could actually buy and use, (if you had the money - the article is right on that point).  Unfortunately, the machine was so advanced that it scared people both within IBM and its client base.
Jjcarder 17:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not sure about the comment about 'tone' 

message: Unfortunately, the numbering of 32, 34, 36, and 38 is confusing.  The S/38 was released one year after the S/34, but it is a much more advanced computer and does not particularly resemble the S/34.  The inner workings of S/38 may call to mind the S/370.  The S/36, however, does resemble its direct predecessor (S/34) in many ways.
Jessemckay 22:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  System/38 is not like the System/34 

message: Is the System/38 not considered a minicomputer like its predecessor the System/34? --Fritts1227 18:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible information to add 

message: The following paragraph from the article is nearly meaningless without either further explanation, or creation of the pages for the wikified-but-nonexistent terms:System/38 and its descendants are unique in being the only existing commercial capability architecture computers. The earlier Plessey 250 was one of the few other computers with capability architecture ever sold commercially. Additionally, the System/38 and its descendants are the only commercial computers ever to use a machine interface architecture to isolate the application software and most of the operating system from hardware dependencies, including such details as address size and register size.Can anyone provide some information on what a capability architecture is, and how the System/38 used one? It's a little odd to claim that it's unique because of this, but then not provide any information on what it is, or how the architecture is implemented. --Kadin2048 17:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just as a followup, it seems that an article has been created at capability architecture, or it's been redirected to a page that seems to explain it, so I think that's one problem solved. (It could still use improvement, though, by someone who was really familiar with how the S/38 implemented the architecture, but at least now the concept is explained.) The link to machine interface still leads to an empty page, though. --Kadin2048 07:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: That paragraph reads as if it were written by a marketing person who was explaining what he/she understood the engineers to be saying, which means the relationship it bears to what the engineers were actually trying to say is unclear.  From looking at that site, I suspect the person who wrote it was a marketing person and might well have misinterpreted some engineer's perhaps half-baked idea as something that actually made it into the system architecture. Guy Harris 07:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: What happened to the machine interface article is that nobody ever wrote it. :-)  It would be an interesting article, although "Technology Independent Machine Interface" would probably be a better title, as there are a lot of types of interfaces to machines, so just "machine interface" would probably be too generic a name, although capitalized "Machine Interface" might also work. Guy Harris 00:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanations needed 

message: You have always been able to have a physically contiguous file.  When creating the file you just used the ALLOCATE(*YES) parameter on the CRTPF (Create Physical File) command.  This has been this way since release 1 of CPF and still works today on the System i.  This feature is usually not used, but is there.
24.73.202.134 (talk) 05:00, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error is text. 

message: An image used in this article, File:IBMSystem38.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:33, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:IBMSystem38.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: They System/36 article shows that computer as being from 1983 to 2000, while the System/38 says it was released in 1979. Unless years count backwards, something is off, since the System/36 was released after the System/38, meaning it couldn't have really come before it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.230.97.126 (talk) 16:22, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is the System/38 'later'? 

message: Somewhere in the article there should be a reference of the role the CREATE PROGRAM MI instruction fills as the only means to compile a PROGRAM OBJECT from an MI template. Essentially the same information also belongs in AS/400 -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 14:16, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Role of CREATE PROGRAM