Re: Is this true?

[Jalapeno <jalapeno1@mac.com>]

In article <3DD84608.9070601@noneofyourbusiness.com>,
 Exegete <millers@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:

> Byron Q. Desnoyers Wimill wrote:
> > JWolf6589 <jwolf6589@aol.comnospam> wrote:
> > 
> >>"All PC-compatible computers [...] are equipped with hardware to
> >>provide this backward compatibility
> > 
> > 
> > Now take the original IBM.  Is it compatible with a System/360?  Is it
> > compatible with an IBM 701?  
> 
> I would guess that English isn't your native language. Since when is a 
> mainframe a PC?
> 

You can run System/360 on a PC. It does require an emulator, though (the 
free Hercules emulator). In fact, I run System/370 OS/MVS 3.8j every day 
on a Pentium II 233mhz Dell laptop in IBM 3033 mode (the Sys/370 
mainframe hardware from about circa 1978) and it does just a shade 
faster than the mips of the original hardware. I run it complete with 
VTAM, TSO and Jes2. 

MVS 3.8j was the last free operating system that IBM released for their 
mainframes. OS/360 is free also and they both are downloadable with the 
emulator. Of course, OS/390 Linux runs too.

It is a great way for newbies to learn mainframe skills, BAL (basic 
assembler language) comes with the operating system but COBOL, PL/I etc 
were never free, they were program products so they aren't included with 
the free operating systems. Hercules is great because if you have one of 
the OS/390 or z/OS demo CD's you can run the same OS on your laptop that 
the "big iron" currently runs. However, parallel sysplex the emulator 
will not do, yet. It is cool to run programs I wrote in the 1970's on my 
laptop, though :o)


> However, from the humble 8088 based PC up to current P4's I can still 
> run DOS and DOS software. Given that that PC is over 20 years old, 
> that's a pretty impressive compatibility record.
> 
> That is a dreadful compatibility record.
> > When comparing the product line of Apple to IBM compatible computers,
> > you have to keep in mind that you are comparing them to a platform which
> > is defined by certain features.  
> 
> Here's a wonderful example of how not to write a clear, concise, and to 
> the point sentence.
> 

Correcting grammar or typos/spelling is poor netiquette. Making an issue 
of it is not very nice. If you don't understand what Byron wrote, ask 
him to rephrase, then flame him for being incorrect. ;o)

<snip>