[Info-vax] What would you miss if DECnet got the chop? Was: "bad select

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2016-09-19 22:12, Bob Koehler wrote:
> In article <U3XDz.520650$oJ4.400071 at fx23.ams1>, Dirk Munk <munk at home.nl> writes:
>>
>> Bob didn't mention MAC OS. MACs also had FAL, and it was a beautiful
>> implementation. If you copied a file from MAC to MAC (using your VMS
>> system for the command), the complete file would be transferred,
>> resource fork + data fork. If you copied a file to your VMS system, only
>> the data fork would be copied, the resource fork was useless for VMS.
>
>    Well, we had Macs, and we have Pathworks for Macs, but I only listed
>    DECnet implementations that I myself had used and we didn't have
>    DECnet on those Macs.
>
>    The wonderfull thing with FAL was that it sits on DNA, which
>    understands RMS on VMS, RMS and FCS on RSX, whatever they call it
>    on MVS, and byte streams on all those other things.  Somebody really
>    did good work on DNA.

FAL is a good example of when DEC got it right.
CTERM is a good example of when DEC got it wrong.
There are good and bad parts in DECnet... :-)

	Johnny