🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <124864@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>, bender@oobleck.Central.Sun.COM (Michael Bender) writes:
> I haven't seen much activity (zero actually) on comp.sys.intel.ipsc310
> is there anyone out there that's got a 310 (running xenix or rmx) that
> may have missed this newsgroup and wants to talk about it?  I've got a
> 310 running xenix at home, and I'd hate to think that I'm the only person
> in North America doing this.... but maybe so.

	You are not the only one...  We still have a number of 310's and
and 310/311's running applications for scientific instruments and data
acquisiton.  In all cases the systems have one or more analog I/O boards
made by Burr-Brown and other vendors in the Multibus cardcage.  Most of the
systems run XENIX, but two run RMX-86.  We also bought MS-DOS from Intel,
but never used it for anything.  PLM-86 sucks; whatever we have written
has been in C or assembly language.

	For various reasons which are too complex to explain here, we
haven't done any new 310 applications in 1-1/2 years, though.  We now use
a CMOS STD bus with 16-bit processors for all analog and instrument
interface, which either operate standalone or communicate with 3B2's
or 386 PC's running UNIX for more complex applications.  Size and cost
were some of the more important reasons for the migration from the 310.

	Incidently, if the price were right, I could be interested in
buying spare 310 systems and/or components.  We are committed to keeping
our systems running for a while, and the Intel prices are not exactly
bargains.

<>  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. - Uniquex Corp. - Viatran Corp.
<>  UUCP   {allegra|boulder|decvax|rutgers|watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry
<>  TEL  716/688-1231 | 716/773-1700  {hplabs|utzoo|uunet}!/      \uniquex!larry
<>  FAX  716/741-9635 | 716/773-2488     "Have you hugged your cat today?"