Smithsonian gets it wrong
pechter at gmail.com
Sun Nov 13 16:23:02 CST 2005
a.carlini at ntlworld.com wrote:
>Vassilis Prevelakis wrote:
>>Hello?? The label says its a *MICRO*VAX, and if its a uVAX, then its
>>not a mini. Also, calling the baby-sized uVAX a mini gives visitors
>>who may have never seen a mini-computer the wrong idea as to what a
>>mini-computer looks like. Sure I'll accept that its *compatible* with
>>a VAX (I'll even ignore the minor business of emulating a small part
>>of the instruction set :-), but is not a VAX.
>I'd not call the MicroVAX a mini, but it *is* a VAX. The
>architecture was subsetted to allow some latitude in
>implementation, but user mode code did not need to
>worry about that: the instructions still worked.
>A VAX, is a VAX, is a VAX.
I'm not sure the 11/725 and 11/730 and MicroVaxI weren't 11/34A's with
delusions of grandeur. 8-(
More information about the cctalk