Von Neumann Computers: The Von Neumann architecture is a computer design model that uses a processing unit and

a single separate storage structure to hold both instructions and data. It implements a universal turing machine and the common referential model of Specifying sequential architecture in cons tract with parallel architectures. The term Stored Program Computer is generally used to mean a computer of this design. The Term Von Neumann Computer has two common meanings.Its Strictest definition refers to a specific type of computer or architecture in which instructions and data are stored together in a common memory. This type of architecture is distinguished from the Harvard architecture in which separate memories are used to store instructions and data.The term Von Neumann computers also is used colloquially to refer in general to computer that execute a single Sequence of instructions, which operate on a single stream of data values.That is Colloquially von-Neumann computers are the typical computers available today. The von Neumann Computer Model: Von Neumann computer systems contain three main building blocks:

1.the central processing unit (CPU), 2.memory, 3. input/output devices (I/O). These three components are connected together using the system bus. The most prominent items within the CPU are the registers: they can be manipulated directly by a computer program.

2. Limitations of Stored Program Concept:

1. 2.

The architecture created an immense quantity of disparate systems, each with their own storage systems, operating system instances, and particulars with respect to configuration and security. The environment was extremely complex, with each program, data store and computer being an independent asset that was not part of a central catalog or homogeneous management facility. Large companies typically employed hundreds or thousands of staff members simply to manage the assets in this inventory.

3.

The architecture was extremely expensive, with each program, data store, operating system and communications technology requiring distinct employee expertise, software licensing, hardware maintenance and support consulting.

4.

The component systems, programs and information structures were separate and distinct, meaning there were no facilities to apply rules or service features across all the information or processes of a client, project, industry, employee or organization. To bridge the disparate systems, efforts in the form of integration projects were required, each to integrate some sub-domain of system information or components. In large companies, the complete technology plant was rarely

integrated at any moment because constant component changes or upgrades frequently impaired or broke integration work in progress. 5. The architecture was extremely slow and inefficient. Although any single device could process up to billions of instructions and millions of processes per second (if slow disk storage was avoided during processing), each information transaction typically queried multiple services across multiple computers after the transaction request was made. This made each transaction subject to delays due to resource coordination, communication latency and processing delays due to resource contention. This design limited such systems performance, even those consisting of thousands of servers. 6. The architecture was extremely fragile and insecure. The system contained many parts with minimal management facilities. The operating system software was not self aware and thus was frequently hijacked for unintended purposes without patron awareness3. Vulnerabilities at any point within the systems inventory could impair major portions of a systems availability. 7. Processing redundancy was distributed in a serial instead of parallel manner. In parallel redundant systems, multiple devices multiply the mean time between failure of the overall system, thus making systems more reliable. In the serial redundancy of PC/Server architecture, any single device failure would typically impair a portion the system, thus dividing the mean time between failure and reducing overall system reliability.