RMT wrote:
Would you mind telling me where I said, or even implied that they were not different? Or even tell me where I made reference specifically to the processor or ROM?
Here is where you made that reference:
I am convinced I know more than you, especially if you think his use of "tweak" meant anything other than a vague reference to somehow changing the basic design of the computer's underlying processing.
My interpretation was about the s/360 emulator in the ROM. In the above quote you were technically talking about “Tweaking†the processor.
For more reference:
The production machine was designed at IBM’s General Systems Division laboratory at Rochester, Minnesota, and was made available as a product, the IBM 5100 machine, in 1974-less than a year and a half from the start. This remarkably short development cycle for such a complex new product can be attributed in large part to the fact that emulation was used again, even in the final product. This time, however, although the same Palm internal engine was used, System/360 architecture was emulated rather than 1130 architecture, so that the up-to-date APLSV product system could be used as the APL facility with virtually no modification. There were some changes, however, that anticipated later developments in personal computers.
http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/304/ibmsj3004C.pdf
Palm internal engine is the processor. The 360 emulator is present in the memory. Processor only processes the data.
No matter how I point out the mistakes in your words, you continue to say I am wrong, and you still don’t know what the interpretation is. We could better stop the conversation.
I see the Titor story as an interesting story. But you see it as something else.
