THAT is the root of the argument. PSI says they are a "PCM" (Plug
Compatible Mainframe). That is the same term used for Amdahl, etc. and
was the subject of, and resolved by, historical lawsuits. IBM does not
agree that 1) they are a PCM, or 2) this has been resolved in the past.
Tony Thigpen
-----Original Message -----
From: Stracka, James (GTI)
Sent: 12/06/2006 09:12 AM
How does PSI differ from amdahl, NAS, Hitachi and other IBM compatible
hardware vendors from the past?
-----Original Message-----
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Boyes
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 4:30 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM sues PSI
First, I don't think IBM is branching out into the healthcare area.
Obligatory historical footnote: IBM *did* build lab blood chemistry and
other biomedical equipment starting in 1972 (cf. the 2991 Blood Cell
Processor). Equipment manufacturing and repair ended in 1984 with the
sale of the biomedical business to COBE Laboratories, Inc.
(One assumes you meant patent infringement.)
Indeed.
--------------------------------------------------------
If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender,
delete it and do not read, act upon, print, disclose, copy, retain or
redistribute it. Click here for important additional terms relating to this
e-mail. http://www.ml.com/email_terms/
--------------------------------------------------------
