CompuServe Thread

Brad: The heart of a computer is the CPU. Each CPU has a specific instruction set requiring specific coding. Thus, something written specifically for an Intel Pentium will not operate on a IBM/Motorola PowerPC chip. There is a limited degree of portability in some higher level languages like C. You can, for instance, write code in C that will ultimately perform the same operations on a 486, 680×0, PowerPC or Alpha. You can run your C code through a compiler that will translate it from one platform to another. But here's the catch: many of the system level calls for each platform still have to be hand coded for the specific platform. UNIX, I think, was the first attempt to create a universal operating system that would allow transparent portability from one platform to another. Nice idea. But it didn't work. There were soon so many different flavors of UNIX that portability was lost in most cases. Windows NT is the latest attempt to create a true platform independent operating system. Microsoft has done a damned good job in getting the various players to cooperate together. Right now, Windows NT is implemented on the Intel x86 and Pentium CPU's, the PowerPC and the Alpha. (By way of example, look at how much trouble IBM is having in porting its very own OS/2 to the PowerPC.) In theory, high level C code could be written and it could run on any of these processors. But the reality is that so many programmers take their own direction and have their own ideas about what's right, that you still run into major problems. You're much better off buying application software that has been specifically optimized for the particular CPU and Operating System you're using. The most recent example I can think of in swapping high level core code from one platform to another is Microsoft Word 6.0. On Windows machines, it's an adequate performer. Yet when they translated the code to the Macintosh 680×0, it was a disaster. It worked (in the sense that any Microsoft product works), but it was slower than ice in January because the code was simply not optimized for the Macintosh OS and 680×0 CPU. Personally I'm not even looking at the Alpha. It's a very fine CPU and will probably be around for a long time with lots of applications to choose from for mainstream business processing tasks. But I kind of doubt it will build the momentum and marketbase necessary to be a long time option for niches like animation and 3D rendering. Personally I'd stick with the Pentium for no other reason than it's widespread use. Jerry