mini versus micro?

[Tony Duell]

> 
> One thing that I have been wondering for a while is what the current 
> definition of minicomputer is.
> It used to be contrasted with microcomputers, the telling difference being a 
> multichip processor implementation versus a single-chip microprocessor [if so, 
> are the POWER1 and POWER2 processors 
> minicomputer processors?] but now, with microprocessors being used in 

I used to think of a micro as having a processor that was either a single 
chip _or a chipset that was only used to make that processor_. That means 
the 11/03 amd 11/23 are micros, soe are the the POWER1 and POWER2, but 
things like the 11/45, VAX 11/730, PERQ 1, rtc are minis because the CPU 
is bullt from TTL, bitslice chips, etc that are used for many things 
other than making that particular processor.


> mainframes (and even on-topic mainframes) is this distinction meaningless [i.e. 
> should the designation "microcomputer" in its size/power context be replaced with 
> something else?] and, if so, does the [whatever micro becomes]/mini/mainframe 
> become a question of mass (>700 lbs mainframe, >100 lbs mini, <100 lbs [???]), 
> or history (the HP3000 started life as a mini, therefore the spectrum models 
> continue as minis . . .), or does the venerable minicomputer cease to exist? 
> any other ideas?

'If you've lost your logic probe inside it, it's a micro. If you've lost 
your oscilloscope inside it, it's a mini. If you've lost yourself inside 
it, it's a mainframe' :-)

-tony