Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: quadibloc <quadibloc@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: mainframe vs mini, old and slow base and bounds, Why I've Dropped In
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:25:47 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <9831f9ab34c5e03c9d63a6607b74fa68@www.novabbs.com>
References: <0c857b8347f07f3a0ca61c403d0a8711@www.novabbs.com> <3820c79f32d4c2368c3d85f1d5141752@www.novabbs.com> <8zc6Q.1100424$%uk3.140162@fx10.iad> <4c8c711f884b1e11ce83b7b13a63d1f5@www.novabbs.com> <103cn7t$28np$1@gal.iecc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1771221"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="GSAUMsvIs05PgSAevbIzdWiOy1BcuThtiv166p5NnMk";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Posting-User: 7260c650ae4d5ba82d3b6b1eab0ac1b8653ff052
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$etx.nvtN9Ba/F5KP4lYNF.uCT1kDzG1/pA9KGSkOtA/5MB92I4kFW
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0

On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 23:16:13 +0000, John Levine wrote:

> In that era IBM made their own chips, so there's no way they'd have used
> an Intel microprocessor.

Oh, yes, I realize that. And an 8008 wouldn't have corresponded to
what had been claimed to have been used in the System/360 model 115:
a microprocessor that could either execute microcode to implement the
System/370 instruction set, or microcode to function as a channel.

Whatever type of circuitry IBM used in the 370/115, and whether or not,
even if it took multiple chips, it could be termed a "microprocessor"
by any common definition, I do not know. I simply noted the 8008 as
showing that I was mistaken in dismissing the possibility of an IBM
designed microprocessor in the 115 out of hand; the technology did
exist at that time.

John Savard