[Info-vax] VAX/VMS V1, V1.5 or anything older than V5

[David Froble]

Nomen Nescio wrote:
> Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
> 
>>> To be fair, TSO was no worse than what was available elsewhere *at the time*
>>> and in many cases, considerably better. Are you really going to tell me TSO
>>> edit is worse than flipping load switches on a PDP box (that wasn't built
>>> for another decade or so) or even using TECO (even though it hadn't been
>>> developed and wouldn't be for a decade?) Look at all the compilers that
>>> OS/360 had available, 2 versions of FORTRAN, PL/I, COBOL, RPG, and even
>>> things like ALGOL68, SNOBOL4, etc. There's a lot of fun stuff you can
>>> do. Show me another system from the late 1960s that's even half as capable
>>> or productive.
>> There were lots of much better time sharing systems around already then...
> 
> Depends on whether you think a computer system is, a GUI like Microsoft says
> it is, or a platform for actually getting work done, which is what IBM is. I
> see you're a GUI-uberalles kind of guy.
> 
> You seem to be trying to sidestep the question which wasn't addressed to you
> anyway, by saying wow, TSO came out in 1971. So what? It was still better
> than flipping switches on not-yet-invented DEC machines or using TECO.
> 
> The biggest baddest machine DEC ever made couldn't get out of its own
> way. All the DEC stuff was fun for single users but it couldn't make it in
> real life.
> 
>>> What was the state of UNIX in 1970? VMS? Let's compare apples to apples if
>>> you want to make smartass remarks about OS/360 ;-)
>> Happy to. Ever used TOPS-10? It was based on Monitor, which came about 
>> around 1967, and was renamed to TOPS-10 in 1970.
> 
> I used it and it was fine for academic use for 2 or three users. If you need
> to actually run a company bigger than 2 or 3 people you needed a real box.
> 
>> I'm sure others can come up with plenty of other examples... Unix was 
>> ported to the PDP-11 around 1971.
> 
> Yeah but UNIX was still single user for most of the early days and even now
> it's so far behind System Z in RAS, performance, security, stability,
> throughput etc etc etc that it really doesn't matter. The point, again, was
> all the great stuff you could do then and now with OS/360 and all the
> compilers I mentioned. It actually runs. It has real documentation, and real
> error messages you can look up in books. It's stuff the biggest companies
> actually paid money for, not overweight claptraps DEC had to give away to
> colleges.
> 
>> TSO was a dinosaur even when it was new. And it didn't improve much with 
>> time. I remember people using it in the 80s, with little amusement.
> 
> You remembering people using it in the 80s with little amusement sure shoots
> down everything I said. I defer to you, since you know what you're talking
> about ;-)
> 
> Hey Duke, you ever work on a Japanese transmission?
> 
> Nope, but I watched a guy fix a German transmission once...
> 

University of Pittsburgh had DEC system 10s in the very early 1970s, and they handled more 
than 2-3 users.  However, I seriously doubt students placed much of a load on them.  They 
also had TSO in 1969, so I have to question "TSO came out in 1971".  I preferred the 
PDP-10s, but what does a silly student know?

Now, the NAPA Auto parts warehouse in Pittsburgh used one or more PDP-10s, and had them in 
the 1971- 1972 time frame, and that was a business, and the systems did the required work. 
  Note that there were more than 2-3 people in the company.  Not doing any comparisons, 
just reporting what was used, when, where, and how.

At the time, IBM was considered rather "pricy".

In 1973 Transcomm Data Systems was selling timesharing services on RSTS/E and a much 
larger company on the North side of Pittsburgh, OnLine Systems had a room full of PDP-10s 
and sold time sharing services.  Did quite well for that era.

I'm not knocking IBM, they were the standard everyone else aspired to match, but if you're 
going to knock the DEC stuff, well, that ain't how I remember things.