From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 931ef4fc for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 20:17:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 02C489C147; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 06:17:12 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355A69C0FD; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 06:16:28 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="HjN1yS+n"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 3BB459C0FD; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 06:16:26 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qt1-f176.google.com (mail-qt1-f176.google.com [209.85.160.176]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FCF19BFE6 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 06:16:22 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qt1-f176.google.com with SMTP id d18so782460qtj.10 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:16:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=uG/IjDA0uXBXIaGA5IpdBtYm7G7Nkq1phHejmTm4qRw=; b=HjN1yS+ncTl3XFIgaArOhKYj0aCObjkEmoichhngq1BbeqlrQ+xmRcl3miDifo1Q9V +H9YSn5+Lt5dQLsVQ2G3tUXYqas1AYC0XJANq7Ujg/u3pGki1swPNERo3jZR/RcTE5qY UOuk5Qo5rQCObEeiyJjMjf08ShjuKlGaMz1vU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uG/IjDA0uXBXIaGA5IpdBtYm7G7Nkq1phHejmTm4qRw=; b=b4D3uQH++us+PZAC6EX8KP8swe33p/sNYBjuUWj76bwCP/U/c3RH9SA9qQt6xAJuhv wx1SShQ62qUeheKGWvgtb2n94UTtaGxTl0lEL5AObjn/rCvQtWopKNND8ZAjx+9VXR/o ptSdVdib/N6DNI2fKPSDbVBdeExc/hUM+CzTC7RJnFxu9iWlh44w1NmWdULbw83hygXs 1DJqdwpbcvaPxlZK6cYkSL/umAeR8v7htroNNQ+Qni7r19clHH7a9U30dbs+xx3t2jqV TUjAIuBO6NjkcesOOJj8CItKyIbgITW6yqYwtkD1xPt3gIDb68GpH+pXg16nXmsjmtvM ABng== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXJZfZbd03ckBfdKhqX6qdDwVixKWtDJ5rclfuhnrC7KsCz4ROR EnwhGIzfLZf7m1Yl521vFN+4pjnkv1yvsU4hWO3Wh1SlZwuLMQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxszyfPmxxl3u6zTRBAnARCi6JMMpON0EG1eRtE+sosqYKN0fXv3z6UwBJu4Nm1x3M6XnCpyUg6EwiRp9eLk5E= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4513:: with SMTP id q19mr1086332qtn.253.1579551381678; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:16:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200117195908.GF15253@ancienthardware.org> <20200118035051.GC481935@mit.edu> <20200118041913.GB67053@eureka.lemis.com> <20200119024900.GA15860@mit.edu> <20200119031225.GI67053@eureka.lemis.com> <20200119035808.GK67053@eureka.lemis.com> <20200119132551.GC15860@mit.edu> <20200120180432.GJ28686@mcvoy.com> <202001201946.00KJk5er3071186@darkstar.fourwinds.com> In-Reply-To: <202001201946.00KJk5er3071186@darkstar.fourwinds.com> From: Clem Cole Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 15:15:55 -0500 Message-ID: To: Jon Steinhart Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000027ce9059c97f77e" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Early Linux and BSD (was: On the origins of Linux - "an academic question") 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: , Cc: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000027ce9059c97f77e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 2:47 PM Jon Steinhart wrote: > I remember it slightly differently than Clem, but close. Ouch -- I was 1/2 of the Magnolia development team -- I remember a lot about it!!! For the curious when bitsavers comes back: http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/tektronix/magnolia/ Roger Bates had just finished the Dorado at PARC. I had just left CMU. We were cubical mates in TekLabs. Motorola had an experimental chip that was not yet numbered. We were given them in the Computer Research group in Tek Labs. So, we started building a personal computer at night for ourselves. Our boss saw the notes and asked what we would do differently if Tek paid for it. I was originally using 8" floppies and immediately said 'a real disk.' We got a Tek '$10K project' and a few months to build a prototype. I already had written (well sort of hacked) a simple C compiler based on Dennis's PDP-11 compiler (when it screwed up it would sometimes include PDP-11 code - and I never supported FP). Paul Blattner wrote an assembler and linker. Using that, Steve Glaser and I ported UNIX/V7 to it. > The Magnolia wasn't a UNIX workstation, it was an experimental Smalltalk > machine. That was 2+ years later actually. Once they had the system, a couple of other folks moved Smalltalk to it. And in fact, it eventually did release it as a product called the 4404. > I don't recall > much about it, but I don't think that it had to address many of the > problems > that UNIX had at the time with the 68000 such as the lack of a MMU. Be careful... It most definitely did have an MMU, I designed it!!! The Xerox Altos and Dorado's never had MMU's. So Roger was not familiar with them. I had to teach him. Magnolia had a base/limit register MMU similar to the PDP-11/70. The original OS was V7 and swapped. It ran just fine. > I think > that the Magnolia predated the 68010 and certainly predated the 68020 and > awful but usable PMMU. The wire-wrapped prototype was originally an X-series chip and yes the first 'production' units were real 10Mhz 68000s. After I went back to grad school, Roger spliced a 68010 into and ripped out my MMU. The late Terry Laskodi put 4.1BSD on it. > Part of the issue was that the Magnolia was developed in Tek Labs, which > was > the research end of things. It wasn't a product organization, the Magnolia > at the time hadn't gone through any of the rigorous environmental testing > required by Tek which was a company that actually provided warranty > service. > And there was no marketing, not that Tek was a marketing powerhouse. Given > the way that things panned out I don't think that the Magnolia would have > been > a player once things like Suns appeared, if for no other reason that Tek > had no > clue as to how to do anything in volume and our stuff was way too > expensive. > Very possible, but they did have first mover position. In fact, folks at Harvard Business as much as said so later. There is a great HBS case study written about it called "Why Skunk Projects Don't Work" (which I have somewhere) -- I should get that scanned at added to the Magnolia archive on BitSavers. > > In any case, while the 32032 was a problem, the real reason that Tek failed > in the workstation biz was management. No doubt... but it was 3 years later. Which I think was a huge issue. > "well, we have 2 RS-232 ports and a parallel port and so we'll work with > that." Which of course was what Magnolia had been 3.5 years earlier and was what became the 4404 Smalltalk machine. --000000000000027ce9059c97f77e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On M= on, Jan 20, 2020 at 2:47 PM Jon Steinhart <jon@fourwinds.com> wrote:
I remember it slig= htly differently than Clem, but close.=C2=A0
Ouch -- I was 1/2 of t= he=C2=A0Magnolia development=C2=A0team -- I remember a lot about it!!!
For the curious when bitsavers=C2=A0come= s back:=C2=A0=C2=A0http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/tek= tronix/magnolia/

Roger Bates had just finished the Dorado at PA= RC.=C2=A0 I had just left CMU.=C2=A0 =C2=A0We were cubical mates in TekLabs= .=C2=A0 =C2=A0Motorola had an experimental chip that was not yet=C2=A0numbe= red.=C2=A0 =C2=A0We were given them in the=C2=A0Computer Research group in = Tek Labs. So, we started building a personal computer at night f= or ourselves.=C2=A0=C2=A0
Our boss saw the notes and asked w= hat we would do differently if Tek paid for it.=C2=A0 I was originally usin= g 8" floppies and immediately=C2=A0said 'a real disk.'=C2=A0 = =C2=A0We got a Tek '$10K project' and a few months to build a proto= type. I already had written (well sort of hacked) a simple C compiler based= on Dennis's PDP-11 compiler (when it screwed up it would sometimes inc= lude PDP-11 code - and I never supported FP).=C2=A0 =C2=A0Paul Blattner wro= te an assembler and linker.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Using that, Steve Glaser and= I ported UNIX/V7 to it.
=C2=A0
The Magnolia w= asn't a UNIX workstation, it was an experimental Smalltalk m= achine.=C2=A0
That was 2= + years later actually.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Once they had the system, a couple of o= ther folks moved Smalltalk to it.=C2=A0 And in fact, it eventually did rele= ase it as a product called the 4404.


<= div>=C2=A0
I don't recall
much about it, but I don't think that it had to address many of the pro= blems
that UNIX had at the time with the 68000 such as the lack of a MMU.=C2=A0
Be careful... It most def= initely did have an MMU, I designed it!!!=C2=A0 The Xerox Altos and Dorado&= #39;s never had MMU's.=C2=A0 So Roger was not familiar with them.=C2=A0= I had to teach him.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Magnolia had a base/limit register MMU si= milar to the PDP-11/70.=C2=A0 The original OS was V7 and swapped.=C2=A0 It = ran just fine.

=C2=A0
I think
that the Magnolia predated the 68010 and certainly predated the 68020 and awful but usable PMMU.=C2=A0
The wire-wrapped prototype was originally an X-series chip and yes the= first 'production' units were real 10Mhz 68000s.=C2=A0 =C2=A0After= I went back to grad school, Roger spliced a 68010 into and ripped out my M= MU.=C2=A0 The late Terry Laskodi put 4.1BSD on it.
<= br>
=C2=A0
Part of the issue was that the Magnolia was develo= ped in Tek Labs, which was
the research end of things.=C2=A0 It wasn't a product organization, the= Magnolia
at the time hadn't gone through any of the rigorous environmental testi= ng
required by Tek which was a company that actually provided warranty service= .
And there was no marketing, not that Tek was a marketing powerhouse.=C2=A0 = Given
the way that things panned out I don't think that the Magnolia would ha= ve been
a player once things like Suns appeared, if for no other reason that Tek ha= d no
clue as to how to do anything in volume and our stuff was way too expensive= .
Very possible, but= they did have first mover position.=C2=A0 In fact, folks at Harvard Busine= ss as much as said so later.=C2=A0 There is a great HBS case study written about it called "Why Skunk P= rojects Don't Work" (which I have somewhere) -- I should get that = scanned at added to the Magnolia archive on BitSavers.


=C2=A0

In any case, while the 32032 was a problem, the real reason that Tek fa= iled
in the workstation biz was management.=C2=A0
No doubt... but it was 3 years later.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Whic= h I think was a huge issue.


=C2= =A0
=C2=A0"well, we have 2 RS-232 ports and a parallel port and so we'll work with that."=C2=A0
= Which of course was what Magnolia had been 3.5 = years earlier and was what became the 4404 Smalltalk machine.= =C2=A0
--000000000000027ce9059c97f77e--