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 Software Engineer -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 3:59 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM sues maker of Intel-based Mainframe clones Could someone say what is going on with this in people friendly language? (-: I read the PSI filing but I didn't understand it. I have to admit I'm totally confused. One reason was I got PSI mixed up with FSI. Fundamental makes an emulator, right called Flex? And only their systems are allowed to run ADCD and licensed IBM software? And they only sell through resellers, Cornerstone CSI being one of them? So who is PSI? I went to their website, but I still didn't get it. What did they do to anger IBM? Do they have their own emulator that isn't Flex-ES? Thanks for any help in understanding this. Lindy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
