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

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2012-05-30 17:56, David Froble wrote:
> 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?

Students could be horrible at placing load on systems. They did all that 
interactive crap that was horrible for systems... But oh so nice...

TSO: 
http://www.tsotimes.com/articles/archive/spring04/TSO-Times-Spring04.pdf 
(page 5), or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Sharing_Option

So, I doubt you had TSO in 1969... Parity error in memory, or perhaps 
some other product?

> 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.

Not to mention Compuserve, which ran lots of PDP-10 with their own 
hacked version of TOPS-10, although a little later...
They supported rather more than 2-3 users, though...

	Johnny