On 23 February 2016 at 16:46, Toby Thain wrote:
> So where does QNX come in? Isn't that embedded rather than
> desktop/laptop/tablet?
It's also the basis of Blackberry 10, the OS on my Passport.
There is a desktop version -- I wrote about it a few years ago:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11
On 23 February 2016 at 20:15, Charles Anthony
wrote:
>
> And let us not forget the wombat, beloved of the VMS RDBMS.
>
> "PLOT WOMBAT"
I remember discovering WOMBAT in the Help command for RDB, and sitting
there, increasingly bemused, exploring the various options within HELP
WOMBAT... wondering
On 23 February 2016 at 23:41, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>
> Are you sure? I've seen plenty of Freescale cores going pretty low as
> far as power consumption goes, like their whole e200 line to start from
> the very low end, but there's also e6500 for example if you want 64 bits
> and more process
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, Liam Proven wrote:
> POWER chips are still going strong but they're big and run hot taking
> lots of power. Apple needed a CPU line that could offer good notebook
> chips as well as desktop chips, and POWER (and PowerPC) was only
> addressing desktop devices.
Are you sure?
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:57 AM, ben wrote:
> On 2/22/2016 7:42 PM, Eric Christopherson wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, ben wrote:
>>
>>> Where are all to portable compilers and assemblers source code???
>>> Oh wait you have to pay good money for them back then?.
>>> OH now we can't be bothere
On 2/22/2016 7:42 PM, Eric Christopherson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, ben wrote:
Where are all to portable compilers and assemblers source code???
Oh wait you have to pay good money for them back then?.
OH now we can't be bothered to support the small machines,
sorry no source for that. My bigg
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Toby Thain
wrote:
>
>> Seeing Minix 3 on x86 and ARM is good. Unless it wants to wither when
>> the world moves beyond x86 and ARM, it will need to be done with enough
>> portability in mind to make porting it easy, yes, but it is hardly a
>> failing that it isn
On 2016-02-23 9:45 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
On 22 February 2016 at 17:41, Toby Thain wrote:
*Today's* "modern computer market."
Are they doing _that_ or are they going after QNX? Or both? #confused
It's a decade-old project. It needs to run on cheap commodity kit.
Cheap commodity kit means x86
On 22 February 2016 at 17:41, Toby Thain wrote:
> *Today's* "modern computer market."
>
> Are they doing _that_ or are they going after QNX? Or both? #confused
It's a decade-old project. It needs to run on cheap commodity kit.
Cheap commodity kit means x86 and ARM.
What is in any way confusing a
On 22 February 2016 at 17:36, Mazzini Alessandro wrote:
> Not to intrude, but apple could also have gone with the serious power cpu,
> thus not "needing" to move to x86. As long as there's enough of a push, sw
> houses release versions for a different architecture... and power is hardly
> a dead e
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, ben wrote:
> Where are all to portable compilers and assemblers source code???
> Oh wait you have to pay good money for them back then?.
> OH now we can't be bothered to support the small machines,
> sorry no source for that. My biggest gripe for Minux
> other than the racoon
On 2/22/2016 9:58 AM, Mouse wrote:
Portability was a fundamental free software tenet.
Is. Was, perhaps, even, in the non-OS space. But in the OS space, I
think every open-source OS was originally done on some very small
number of architectures. Unix was done on the PDP-11 (something else
bef
On 2016-02-22 3:07 PM, Geoff Oltmans wrote:
On Feb 22, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Mazzini Alessandro wrote:
Not to intrude, but apple could also have gone with the serious power cpu,
thus not "needing" to move to x86. As long as there's enough of a push, sw
houses release versions for a different arc
> On Feb 22, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Mazzini Alessandro wrote:
>
> Not to intrude, but apple could also have gone with the serious power cpu,
> thus not "needing" to move to x86. As long as there's enough of a push, sw
> houses release versions for a different architecture... and power is hardly a
On 2016-02-22 11:58 AM, Mouse wrote:
> Unix was done on the PDP-11 (something else
> before that, I think, but I forget what, and I think it was with the
> move to the -11 that it became portable enough to be ported instead of
> rewritten).
PDP-7, though it was more of a "reimplementation" than a
On 2016-02-22 11:58 AM, Mouse wrote:
Portability was a fundamental free software tenet.
Is.
Yes, a typo. :)
> Was, perhaps, even, in the non-OS space. But in the OS space, I
think every open-source OS was originally done on some very small
number of architectures. Unix was done on the PDP
> Portability was a fundamental free software tenet.
Is. Was, perhaps, even, in the non-OS space. But in the OS space, I
think every open-source OS was originally done on some very small
number of architectures. Unix was done on the PDP-11 (something else
before that, I think, but I forget what
On 2016-02-22 11:17 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
On 22 February 2016 at 16:54, Toby Thain wrote:
Portability was a fundamental free software tenet. It has technical benefits
and it would make the project more relevant. The original Minix was far more
portable.
If it can't adapt to what comes after x
[mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] Per conto di Mark J. Blair
Inviato: lunedì 22 febbraio 2016 17:04
A: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Oggetto: Re: Minix 3 vs portability - was Re: Looking for a small fast VAX
development machine
> On Feb 22, 2016, at 07:54, Toby Thain w
On 22 February 2016 at 16:54, Toby Thain wrote:
> Portability was a fundamental free software tenet. It has technical benefits
> and it would make the project more relevant. The original Minix was far more
> portable.
>
> If it can't adapt to what comes after x86 and ARM in whatever markets(?) it
> On Feb 22, 2016, at 07:54, Toby Thain wrote:
>
> I don't think the current perceived size of x86/ARM markets will protect it
> as effectively as a diversity of targets would. Remember how ubiquitous
> SPARC, VAX, 68K were at one time; if you were stranded there, you don't exist
> now.
As a
On 2016-02-22 10:33 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
On 22 February 2016 at 15:39, Toby Thain wrote:
So has Minix 3 - last I checked, x86 & ARM only - what's the point of that.
Oh, come on. Be fair.
First, it's a student project without a huge amount of visibility in
the outside world.
Secondly, tho
22 matches
Mail list logo
