= Сообщение: 6724 из 7124 ====================================== FTSC_PUBLIC = От : Dan Cross 3:770/100 09 Mar 23 03:14:56 Кому : Fabio Bizzi 09 Mar 23 03:14:56 Тема : Re: FidoNet Technical Standards Committe FGHI : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=3:770/100+bad4c759 На : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=2:335/364.3+64082475 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: ASCII ================================== Ответ: area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=7820.ftscpubl@1:218/700+286e46a3 ============================================================================== On 08 Mar 2023 at 07:00a, Fabio Bizzi pondered and said...
FB> But IMHO, as I wrote to Ward, Before IBM 360 it's hard to find a "real" FB> mainframe, moreover the IBM AS/400 and it's predecessors System 36, FB> AS/38 etc. are all dipartimentals.
Prior to S/360, pretty much all computers were "mainframes". It's kinda like how no one new they were driving a manual transmission car until the Jones's rolled up in their new automatic. The term "mainframe" comes from telecommunications, anyway. Nowadays, of course, it's mostly synonymous with IBM z/Arch machines and compatibles.
Some members of the VAX family were regarded as true mainframes in terms of IO capacity and so on; the 9000 and 10000, for example. Certainly, the PDP-10 was a mainframe. And if we go back to IBM and the 7 dwarfs, we've got machines like the GE 645 that counted. Indeed, when the Multics project was getting off the ground, they were looking very closely at the 360 but went with the GE machine because Gene Amdahl said virtual memory was off the table. The 360/67 was a skunk-works project. Anyway, a DPS-8/M was certainly a mainframe.
