> -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John P Baker > Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 3:21 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: IBM sues maker of Intel-based Mainframe clones > > If I understand the filing, I believe that the difference is that both > FLEX-ES and Hercules are in fact "instruction simulators", whereas PSI was > producing an "instruction emulator". > > IBM alleges that what PSI is doing is translating executable object code > for > zSeries into executable object code for Itanium. That translation is what > is in violation of IBM's patents and licensing agreements. > > The differences between the two are obscure to non-technical types, but > should be easily understandable to anyone having a background in hardware > architecture. > > In the case of the developers of both FLEX-ES and Hercules, I think that I > would be sure to say that what I have is an "instruction simulator". > > John P Baker /snip/
Both FLEX-ES and Hercules are emulators to the extent that a s/390 or z/Architecture program using only the machine instructions that are documented in the PoP cannot determine that it is not running on a native IBM box. By the way, both emulators also support several machine instructions that are not publicly documented by IBM. z/OS relies on some of those undocumented instructions. The only argument that IBM can have with any emulator provider is when the provider supports undocumented instructions. IBM got slapped with a consent decree several years ago, requiring IBM to disclose such undocumented instructions to its competitors. It was called a "TIDA" (Technical Information Disclosure Agreement) document, and it was expensive. A TIDA document looks and reads just like the PoPs description of a single machine instruction. Now that IBM doesn't have to disclose such information to plug-compatible competitors, any competitor that can successfully run z/OS must be using undocumented machine instructions. z/OS cannot run on a machine that only supports the z/PoPs machine instructions. In order to run z/OS, the competitor must use a "real" IBM box and try to reverse engineer the undocumented instructions. This was common practice in the old "consent decree" days for Amdahl and Hitachi, because for some instructions it was cheaper than paying for a TIDA document. I think the patent lawsuit will likely boil down to a "you may not reverse engineer IBM z/Architecture" complaint. It seems that PSI's only defense is to re-argue the old consent decree case, in effect, that IBM is a monopoly when it controls the hardware and the operating system. Jeffrey D. Smith Principal Product Architect Farsight Systems Corporation 700 KEN PRATT BLVD. #204-159 LONGMONT, CO 80501-6452 303-774-9381 direct 303-484-6170 FAX http://www.farsight-systems.com/ comments are invited on my encryption project ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
