[Info-vax] OS implementation languages

[chrisq]

On 8/26/23 00:22, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 8/25/2023 9:03 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2023-08-25, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
>>> On 2023-08-25 14:18, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>> It has now become _very_ clear to me that the use of ALGOL-based 
>>>> languages
>>>> in OS development was very seriously widespread by the time DEC came to
>>>> design VMS. Pity DEC didn't join them.
>>>
>>> Including Multics. Not an outstanding success exactly...
>>> Most companies that went that way early was way less successful than
>>> DEC, so it is kindof strange to claim that DEC did it wrong and they did
>>> it right...
>>>
>>
>> In way too many cases, marketing success (at least in the short term,
>> and sometimes in the longer term) doesn't appear to be related to
>> technical elegance.
>>
>> After all, we all use Windows...
>>
>> OTOH, Unix with its portable HLL approach, has outlasted VMS...
> 
> VMS still exist.
> 
> If we limit Unix to kernel of Unix origin then I don't see it as
> unrealistic that VMS outlast Unix.
> 
> Tru64 is dead. HP-UX is practically dead. Solaris is close to dead.
> AIX is not well. And FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD seem to increasingly
> get status of hobby OS for enthusiasts.
> 
> Arne
> 

Agreed, proprietary unix is more or less dead, because no single
company  has the resources to match the dedicated and partly free
efforts of the open source movement. Small proprietary dev teams vs
potentially thousands of eyes for open source, can never match
that, on quality, delivery, or cost.

Very much FreeBSD here for some years, after decades first with dec,
then Sun. Forms the basic of at least some proprietary offerings, as
well as millions of embedded devices. Linux is still a unix,
and runs the majority of web sites of the world, so if anything,
unix has won the os wars...

Chris