🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <642@umnd-cs.D.UMN.EDU> rhealey@ub.UUCP (Rob Healey) writes:

>	Encore Mutimax series
>	Sequent  (I think)

Sort-of-true.  It does power the Encore Multi-Max series.  And it does
power the old Sequent Balance.  HOWEVER, Sequent has (for some reason)
switched over to 80386's for their new machine(s).  I do not know if
they are totally abandoning the 32k or what (I'm not involved, except
peripherally, with the purchase of this system, so don't know all the
issues).


>	Wonder why the 32k was chosen to be the base unit in multi processor
>	computer's? Probably because the other's couldn't handle the job!

I wonder why Sequent decided to switch?

I have some vague memory about a PC co-processor mode in the Sequent,
but that may have been a bad dream... :-)  Doesn't seem like a very
rational thing to do to me.

>	This message is comming to you from an Encore Multimax. 

This message is coming to you from a Unix PC being used as a terminal
to a Sequent with an rlogin session over to a uVaxII.  It's a long
story and I'm not sure if anybody would believe me anyway....

> 8 CPU's
>	functioning as one fast one. 4.2 BSD, networking, and a whole lot
>	more. Encore and Sequent show the awsome power that can be unleashed
>	from just a 32032. The mind reels at the thought of 32532's in place
>	of 32032's!! Sorry if this sounds like a plug for you know who but
>	their machine is great in the bang/buck catagory although your 
>	average Joe on the street can't buy one.

If I remember correctly, the current MultiMax has 32332's in it.  And
according to the sales guy(s) who visited us a couple weeks ago, they
had a large hand in the development of the 32332 and 32532.

We are currently evaluating machines in order to buy a machine of this
sort.  We have a 23 processor 32032 Sequent in our machine room which
Sequent has lent to us.  It's a nice machine.  In comparing it with the
MultiMax (description only, we've never used one) it seems they're very
very similar machines.  Sequent has an advantage in that they started
earlier and have more fully developed parallel support.  Encore has a
possible advantage in that they aren't in the process of switching
processors.  (I suppose that Sequent will be having some problems
because of this great switch-over).

We don't particularly care what processor is in the machine we finally
get so long as it's very nicely parallel.
-- 
----- David Herron,  cbosgd!ukma!david, david@UKMA.BITNET, david@ms.uky.csnet
----- (also "postmaster", "news", and the Usenet map maintainer for Kentucky.)
----- bsmtp-users@ms.uky.csnet for bsmtp discussion
----- bsmtp-users-request@ms.uky.csnet for administrivia