From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 5760 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2021 18:13:31 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 10 Apr 2021 18:13:31 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 2F80B94129; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 04:13:25 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BA1C93D6B; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 04:12:50 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=planet.nl header.i=@planet.nl header.b="Nos5OGz8"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 7D5B193D6B; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 04:12:41 +1000 (AEST) Received: from cpsmtpb-ews06.kpnxchange.com (cpsmtpb-ews06.kpnxchange.com [213.75.39.9]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CD3B93D69 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 04:12:35 +1000 (AEST) Received: from cpsps-ews30.kpnxchange.com ([10.94.84.196]) by cpsmtpb-ews06.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(8.5.9600.16384); Sat, 10 Apr 2021 20:12:30 +0200 X-Brand: 7abm2Q== X-KPN-SpamVerdict: e1=0;e2=0;e3=0;e4=;e6=(e1=10;e3=10;e2=11;e4=10;e6=1 0);EVW:White;BM:NotScanned;FinalVerdict:Clean X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=T73v89GQ c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=6071ea8e cx=a_idp_e a=ShNidqeCEQB33TAKUUzslw==:117 a=soxbC+bCkqwFbqeW/W/r+Q==:17 a=x1i13A_MHe4A:10 a=3YhXtTcJ-WEA:10 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=AoeSMSUmAAAA:8 a=vGiVyqCtAAAA:8 a=iFMxt-fLd3FEd_vFSzQA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=bNz6bNMmcZcRvyOJ:21 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=2UY7SMgi64q-0UtCmZ5F:22 a=vaq4EC42sbI5ybPrMsII:22 X-CM-AcctID: kpn@feedback.cloudmark.com Received: from smtp.kpnmail.nl ([195.121.84.11]) by cpsps-ews30.kpnxchange.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(8.5.9600.16384); Sat, 10 Apr 2021 20:12:30 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=planet.nl; s=planet01; h=to:date:message-id:subject:mime-version:content-type:from; bh=xy/3PC7IFFSudqskPB7udd+uwkmTXp3x58zSfPDSUbQ=; b=Nos5OGz8YQ9y/BbAuE2NMMjvngu8zJY3SktXH5l7EaLCC0Myff0+xOrTKbbcC5k9QgtSKROccOwM1 lt2FGjtP+TLPIMbBscKsAf/7Ui20rN7F8Yw+neA9Vr9yCvAqzuRzfxLTARULM2zwPQIBa/qPEQjFPM 5pBXUtluXpTirz1M= X-KPN-VerifiedSender: Yes X-CMASSUN: 33|xl57b5ez6oqqRbF3ack8+W+HlHcxCwbV4hOumAPM1OgZtf3wMzPlf8idLF0dgBS xL+zDqbXnYuWv4pHx7a4SEw== X-Originating-IP: 80.101.112.122 Received: from mba1.fritz.box (sqlite.xs4all.nl [80.101.112.122]) by smtp.kpnmail.nl (Halon) with ESMTPSA id 502c042a-9a28-11eb-ab8a-00505699b758; Sat, 10 Apr 2021 20:12:30 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_86B297C0-6557-4F44-A92B-E4E3FE2C340A" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.7\)) Message-Id: Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2021 20:12:29 +0200 To: TUHS main list X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.7) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Apr 2021 18:12:30.0451 (UTC) FILETIME=[1237CC30:01D72E35] X-RcptDomain: minnie.tuhs.org Subject: [TUHS] PC Unix (had been How to Kill a Technical Conference X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Paul Ruizendaal via TUHS Reply-To: Paul Ruizendaal Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --Apple-Mail=_86B297C0-6557-4F44-A92B-E4E3FE2C340A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 11:34 PM Ed Bradford > wrote: >=20 > > Why did a Ph.D., an academic, and a computer scientist not know = about UNIX > > in 1974 or so? 1976? In 1976, some (many?) universities had source = code. > > >=20 > Some knowns/givens at the time ... > 1.) He was a language/compiler type person -- he had created PL/M and = that > was really what he was originally trying to show off. As I understand = it > and has been reported in other interviews, originally CP/M was an = attempt > to show off what you could do with PL/M. > 2.) The 8080/Z80 S-100 style machines we quite limited, they had very > little memory, no MMU, and extremely limited storage in the 8" = floppies > 3.) He was familiar with RT/11 and DOS-11, many Universities had it on > smaller PDP-11s as they ran on an 11/20 without an MMU also with = limited > memory, and often used simple (primarily tape) storage (DECtape and > Cassette's) as the default 'laboratory' system, replacing the earlier = PDP-8 > for the same job which primarily ran DOS-8 in those settings. > 4.) Fifth and Sixth Edition of Unix was $150 for university but to run = it, > it took a larger at least 11/40 or 45, with a minimum of 64Kbytes to = boot > and really need the full 256Kbytes to run acceptably and the cost of a = 2.5M > byte RK05 disk was much greater per byte than tape -- thus the base = system > it took to run it was at least $60K (in 1975 dollars) and typically = cost > about two to four times that in practice. Remember the cost of > acquisition of the HW dominated many (most) choices. >=20 > *I**'ll take a guess, but it is only that.* I *suspect* he saw the = S-100 > system as closer to a PDP-11/20 'lab' system than as a small > timesharing machine. He set out with CP/M to duplication the = functionality > from RT/11. He even the naming of the commands was the same as what = DEC > used (*e.g.* PIP) and used the basic DEC style command syntax and = parsing > rules. That is about it. CP/M predates the Altair / S-100 bus, and was designed = for a heavily hacked Intellec-8 system. CP/M was developed on a PDP-10 based 8080 simulator in 1974. It was = developed for the dual purposes of creating a =E2=80=9Cnative=E2=80=9D = PL/M compiler and to create the =E2=80=9Castrology machine=E2=80=9D. The first versions of CP/M were written (mostly) in PL/M. To some = extent, in 1974 both Unix and CP/M were research systems, with a kernel = coded in a portable language =E2=80=94 but aimed at very different = levels of hardware capability. In 1975 customers started to show up and paid serious money for CP/M = (Omron, IMSAI) - from that point on the course for Kildall / DRI was = set. The story is here: = https://computerhistory.org/blog/in-his-own-words-gary-kildall/?key=3Din-h= is-own-words-gary-kildall = --Apple-Mail=_86B297C0-6557-4F44-A92B-E4E3FE2C340A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 
On Fri, Apr =
9, 2021 at 11:34 PM Ed Bradford <egbegb2 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Why did a Ph.D., an academic, and a computer =
scientist not know about UNIX
> in 1974 or so? 1976? In 1976, some (many?) =
universities had source code.
>

Some knowns/givens at the time ...
1.) He was a language/compiler type person -- he had created PL/M and =
that
was really what he was originally trying to show off.  As I understand =
it
and has been reported in other interviews, originally CP/M was an =
attempt
to show off what you could do with PL/M.
2.) The 8080/Z80 S-100 style machines we quite limited, they had very
little memory, no MMU, and extremely limited storage in the 8" floppies
3.) He was familiar with RT/11 and DOS-11, many Universities had it on
smaller PDP-11s as they ran on an 11/20 without an MMU also with limited
memory, and often used simple (primarily tape) storage (DECtape and
Cassette's) as the default 'laboratory' system, replacing the earlier =
PDP-8
for the same job which primarily ran DOS-8 in those settings.
4.) Fifth and Sixth Edition of Unix was $150 for university but to run =
it,
it took a larger at least 11/40 or 45, with a minimum of 64Kbytes to =
boot
and really need the full 256Kbytes to run acceptably and the cost of a =
2.5M
byte RK05 disk was much greater per byte than tape -- thus the base =
system
it took to run it was at least $60K (in 1975 dollars) and typically cost
about two to four times that in practice.   Remember the cost of
acquisition of the HW dominated many (most) choices.

*I**'ll take a guess, but it is only that.*  I *suspect* he saw the =
S-100
system as closer to a PDP-11/20 'lab' system than as a small
timesharing machine.  He set out with CP/M to duplication the =
functionality
from RT/11.  He even the naming of the commands was the same as what DEC
used (*e.g.* PIP) and used the basic DEC style command syntax and =
parsing
rules.

That is about it. CP/M = predates the Altair / S-100 bus, and was designed for a heavily hacked = Intellec-8 system.

CP/M was developed on a PDP-10 based 8080 simulator in 1974. = It was developed for the dual purposes of creating a =E2=80=9Cnative=E2=80= =9D PL/M compiler and to create the =E2=80=9Castrology = machine=E2=80=9D.

The first versions of CP/M were written (mostly) in PL/M. To = some extent, in 1974 both Unix and CP/M were research systems, with a = kernel coded in a portable language =E2=80=94 but aimed at very = different levels of hardware capability.

In 1975 customers started to show up = and paid serious money for CP/M (Omron, IMSAI) - from that point on the = course for Kildall / DRI was set.

The story is here: https://computerhistory.org/blog/in-his-own-words-gary-kildall/= ?key=3Din-his-own-words-gary-kildall


= --Apple-Mail=_86B297C0-6557-4F44-A92B-E4E3FE2C340A--