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

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2012-05-30 11:50, 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.

Wow. For one not knowing anything, you sure say a lot...

First you shoot off about the 60s, and how much better TSO was than 
anything else out there. And when I point out that TSO didn't exist in 
the 60s, but there was actually rather good timesharing systems already 
by the time TSO came about, you start rambling about Microsoft GUI stuff.
Talk about comparing apples and oranges. The company Microsoft didn't 
even exist in the timeframe we are talking about...
And I've yet see Microsoft to produce a single, usable time sharing system.

> 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.

This is a newsgroup. If you wanted to address a question or a statement 
to a specific question, you should shoot him an email. Try it, it 
actually works.

So, the PDP-10 was definitely invented by 1971. I actually don't 
understand what your problem is in understanding here. You are trying to 
defend a pathetically bad product (TSO) in the face of much better 
product who already existed when TSO was introduced.

Just give it up. It will do you credit...

> 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.

Single user? Yes, I seem to remember that concept. IBM batch was another 
name for it. Let's be honest here, when we talk about interactive, 
timesharing use, IBM just sucked, while DEC was very much on top of the 
game in the late 60s, early 70s.

You wishing otherwise won't make it so.

>>> 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.

So you obviously have not used it. Ok...

>> 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.

I made a comment about your silly claims, such as Unix didn't even exist 
when TSO reigned. I just pointed out that Unix certainly existed at the 
same time as TSO was introduced.

Keep your facts straight. It helps in an argument.

>> 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 ;-)

I obviously know lots more than you do. Even if there definitely are 
things I don't know.

> Hey Duke, you ever work on a Japanese transmission?
>
> Nope, but I watched a guy fix a German transmission once...

And that should tell us what, exactly?

	Johnny