From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id e6929995 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:07:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 1AE4DA1CC7; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 02:07:15 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E8AFA1A1A; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 02:06:53 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b=F9p7DXbd; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id AE7C9A1A1A; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 02:06:49 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-it0-f48.google.com (mail-it0-f48.google.com [209.85.214.48]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 118A8A1A19 for ; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 02:06:49 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-it0-f48.google.com with SMTP id j81-v6so2803215ite.0 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 09:06:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+on2cXeU9K8SqIJZpz72CR7EzcpARVp6Qn46FOs0x/Y=; b=F9p7DXbdLqU/42HQ4kfe3poV+xFogf/o5dGmRria/E8qCI+kKHi2YvnT0AH3mgLgCd 3NjzRQmt782uLZVM/+2SL6movTo4A/tYSfv9xJSpZotl8zly68xrBf3G4ZGs5B83nC/M wzVyFW7ohE5CBFo2E7KSAWWwo+L9hxvlfxfS4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+on2cXeU9K8SqIJZpz72CR7EzcpARVp6Qn46FOs0x/Y=; b=QRqVvyfyel9zCZN91tGqmIfIep7lyQtAhCC7T0JdgMZ9T37oZWfHb7T7L0CZ/0K4rL rL8QgFUr9vps6DdMkxpAIlGc5uuYNHa9kNIeFze7yElFt3ofDjDiI+DeS8Ejxd6+oDnm ls1pTOOaBbdO2y5srCEB3pKbdD48kRPWUtaLCEeh1m3uyDh4n/lzAqsuL8PIsGTy4mbA Q3h0VVkp3zOe2SJqNMzE6pFs7uni3rf6aWN4RDwhIW0IFVoZgGtUYQEH81yEzNQmY5bs 5qthP2Tl/R6zeQ/XbiOOKhVwRR4ZHMTmsinYpXzlnMemrVXkm0yaR4CnJNNozAJSwQm/ 2nxg== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51Cr8QG0k669kn/s+unFcRwgKZR55SuXdG54148mwYekOC0s9DEV 5ESRQMfSfqkgLVOxf2N+HaKymGMMN0g1XWJdNvpgyZHn X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdZaE6CjOWZFMgrvmR6Ef8iVQn4mZWp+MYK0xmORDVPCDO2g0bjjA/P7+uv5wt+KRIe+m83su9k4OEATdHD6FrE= X-Received: by 2002:a24:e210:: with SMTP id q16-v6mr1838499ith.142.1535126808474; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 09:06:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1535123616.1824656.1485063544.08BED1A8@webmail.messagingengine.com> In-Reply-To: <1535123616.1824656.1485063544.08BED1A8@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Clem Cole Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 12:06:22 -0400 Message-ID: To: Seth Morabito Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001ac2b80574309020" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Research UNIX on the AT&T 3B2? X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --0000000000001ac2b80574309020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 11:13 AM Seth Morabito wrote: > ... > I've begun to wonder whether 3B2 hardware was used very much inside of > Bell Labs. > I'd be curious to hear of people that actually used it. AT&T forced you to buy one with SVR3 as the porting base (I'd have never had bought the one we had a Stellar otherwise). The only time I ever knew anyone run one, was to check to see the behavior of some code/validation testing of RFS *etc*... The HW as pretty slow/inflexible compared to 68020/68030 which came out around the same time, so it was just not interesting - *i.e.* 'JAWS' - Just another work station' and it did not have a display. IIRC, it was a server and pretty inflexible in the I/O subsystem for that use. Sun would quickly produce the first Sparcs, which as Larry has pointed out, kicked butt and were cheaper . The MIPS chip would emerge with lots of designs, and for that matter the 040 and the 386 would appear soon their after , too. I've always felt that the 3Bx series was an example of fighting the previous war; other than 3B4000 (which had high reliability but other issues in practice to use it), there was never anything that made them special - compared to everyone else. The only 'successful' product that I can remember that used the WE32100 was the second version (*a.k.a.* product version) of the Blit (Bart's first version was 68000 IIRC). Does anyone know of another product? I think I was told the 5ESS changed the SLICs design from the original 68000 design to WE32100 but I was no longer associated with anyone working on it by then, so I don't know. Dennis once remarked to a couple of us that the WE32100 was an example of AT&T wanting to make sure it had its own recipe to make processors, but it was not clear it was worth it. BTW: around the same time both AT&T and HP were making their own DRAM too. It was common thinking in management at tech companies - telling folks that they needed to be 'vertically integrated.' But in the case of both HP and AT&T there internally produced DRAM chips cost 2-3 times what the merchant market cost; so besides the investment in the fab (which was huge) it was a pretty expensive insurance policy. That said, this was also the end times for the idea of the 'second source.' Chip manufacturers would be required to license their designs to some one else (for instance AMD was originally Intel's second source). I think HP was using a second source license for their memory, but IIRC AT&T had developed its own because they had higher reliability standards. --0000000000001ac2b80574309020 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 11:13 AM Seth Morabito <web@loomcom.com> wrote:
=
...
I've begun to wonder whether 3B2 har= dware was used very much inside of Bell Labs.=C2=A0
=
I'd be curious to hear o= f people that actually used it.=C2=A0 AT&T forced you to buy one with S= VR3 as the porting base (I'd have never had bought the one we had a Ste= llar otherwise).=C2=A0 =C2=A0
The only time I ever knew anyone r= un one, was to check to see the behavior of some code/validation testing of= RFS etc...

Th= e HW as pretty slow/inflexible compared to 68020/68030 which came out aroun= d the same time, so it was just not interesting - i.e. 'JAWS'= ; - Just another work station' and it did not have a display.=C2=A0 IIR= C, it was a server and pretty inflexible in the I/O subsystem for that use.= =C2=A0 =C2=A0
S= un would quickly produce the first Sparcs, which as Larry has pointed out, = kicked butt
and were cheaper
.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The MIPS = chip would emerge
with lots of designs,
and for tha= t matter the 040 and the 386 would appear soon their after
, too.

= I've always felt that the 3Bx series was an example of fighting the pre= vious war; other than 3B4000 (which had high reliability but other issues i= n practice to use it), there was never anything that made them special - co= mpared to everyone else.

The only 'successful' product=C2=A0
that I can
remember=C2=A0that used the WE32100 was the
second version (a.k.a. product version)= of the Blit (Bart's first version was 68000 IIRC).=C2=A0 Does anyone k= now of another product?=C2=A0 I think I was told the 5ESS
changed
=C2=A0the SLICs
design
from the origi= nal 68000 design to WE32100 but I was no
longer as= sociated with anyone working on it by then, so I don't know.

Dennis once remarked to a coupl= e of us that the WE32100 was an example of AT&T wanting to make sure it= had its own recipe to make processors, but it was not clear it was worth i= t.=C2=A0 =C2=A0BTW: around the same time both AT&T and HP were making t= heir own DRAM too.=C2=A0 It was common thinking in management at tech compa= nies - telling folks that they needed to be 'vertically integrated.'= ;=C2=A0 But in the case of both HP and AT&T there internally produced D= RAM chips cost 2-3 times what the merchant market cost; so besides the inve= stment in the fab (which was huge) it was a pretty expensive insurance poli= cy.

That said, = this was also the end times for the idea of the 'second source.'=C2= =A0 =C2=A0Chip manufacturers would be required to license their designs to = some one else (for instance AMD was originally Intel's second source).= =C2=A0 =C2=A0I think HP was using a second source license for their memory,= but IIRC AT&T had developed its own because they had higher reliabilit= y standards.
--0000000000001ac2b80574309020--