[Info-vax] HP adds OpenVMS Mature Product Support beyond the end of Standard Support

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <lcl27t$8nd$2 at iltempo.update.uu.se>,
	Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> writes:
> On 2014-02-01 07:41, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> In article <lchjb3$94r$1 at iltempo.update.uu.se>,
>> 	Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> writes:
>>> On 2014-01-31 11:40, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>> In article <lcgn57$pgm$1 at iltempo.update.uu.se>,
>>>> 	Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> writes:
>>>>> On 2014-01-31 07:24, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>>>> But don't think it is only Unix that is going to outlast VMS, the VAX's
>>>>>> great-grandfather the PDP-11 is now scheduled to be around in some very
>>>>>> critical positions until at least 2050.  I wonder what OS or if it is a
>>>>>> bare metal operation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/19/nuke_plants_to_keep_pdp11_until_2050/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmmm....   Maybe that's why some guy bought all that IP from Mentec...
>>>>>
>>>>> If I were to guess, they would be running RSX.
>>>>> And yes, there are still PDP-11 CPUs being made. So the PDP-11 did
>>>>> manage to outlive the VAX.
>>>>
>>>> It also outlived the Alpha dn I have little doubt it will outlive
>>>> the Itanium.
>>>
>>> Good point. :-)
>>>
>>>>> I know of plenty of places still running PDP-11s in business critical
>>>>> places. Some are being replaced by emulated machines, though.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If we could just get some fabbed with todays tech.  Just think what
>>>> a performance jump you would get with just the process shrink.  Let's
>>>> see, then we need SATA controllers.  How about modern (external)
>>>> memory management?  Now, where's my plans for that PDP-11 laptop....
>>>
>>> You could an enormous performance jump. But what are you talking about
>>> with memory management? There is nothing wrong with the MMU in the
>>> PDP-11. The only problem the PDP-11 had was the age old thing Bell said
>>> already in 1973 or so. Too few address bits...
>>> Not that this obstacle can't be worked around, but that is the only
>>> serious problem I can see.
>>
>> Exactly.  I would like to see it "worked around".  I have a 6809 with
>> 16 address lines.  It has 512K of memory and I have seen this machine
>> with as much as 2 meg.  I would like to see a PDP-11 with more than
>> 2 Meg of memory.
>>
>> Of course, being as they are still being made, it would be real
>> interesting to see a new PDP-11 with more address lines, too. :-)
>> There I go dreaming again.  :-)  But, you have to admiit, it could
>> be a lot of fun.
>>
>> Hmmm..   Let's see...  How many overlays would it take to get Open
>> Office running on a PDP-11?   :-)
> 
> Eh.. What? Any "modern" PDP-11 already have 22 address lines...
> My PDP-11 at home have 4 megs of ram.
> Have you never seen a PDP-11 with that? Under which rock have you been 
> the last 40 years, Bill? :-)

Of course I have.  I have an 11/93.  Only has 2meg and I have never been
able to find any PMI for it.  But I want more!!  My comment on the 6809
was only to show that 16 address lines didn't limit it to 64K so why
should 22bist limit the PDP-11 to a measly 4meg.  :-)

I guess it's really is true.  This is not the medium for subtle humor.

bill

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999 at cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>