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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 16372 invoked from network); 17 Mar 2021 21:30:11 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 17 Mar 2021 21:30:11 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id AD6499B7C5; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 07:30:10 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D33CE9B68A; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 07:29:52 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="tAqoaaYF"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 3853D9B68A; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 07:29:51 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-ej1-f48.google.com (mail-ej1-f48.google.com [209.85.218.48]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CF8F9B688 for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 07:29:50 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ej1-f48.google.com with SMTP id b7so641527ejv.1 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 14:29:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9jZQ0nNWYgaXlRf2GQlgxxFTuBlBSeULVSULxP8bToM=; b=tAqoaaYFg8CJkCSGWmiRlSkqo2X4B8nsZqvkcNGgWG6q+6Kv7SVq7WPlFseffZZynP K/dF2XfxJREoZlEeQg2ovVa+JciJa/9+NxrTVnKvb9nPdXLFqfLzpzmwMpmQ8OOIHNGC HTzSoOJXZbCq25+882CCgnt9MHQskF8fzejjjsFYl1xWEI6KclQt1eAKn/VmYJ7keXqk BkkcwfiKyndIFo1ZkA6Gjx21XilyYB55k5hEkN0Ug/Xf+cbhojH8b3CGnT4wQrq5AAfQ /5fPJv/SyE2CDChc/F+PQh/b/TkMgsRMq0vOyFGcWHs6uiOSXM3MOvH3JMBlqX3z7R4v 3Esg== 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=9jZQ0nNWYgaXlRf2GQlgxxFTuBlBSeULVSULxP8bToM=; b=au/IAJ6dcBqksOu5qPyFi2Fu5xjK3wDDAtxi7H1OaEwGXUxEio73cw0aeMUpWRT2Ly kwQNK1DyVCa9xFnj8JqENbXfc8XazsrPifjqGd3G8TJnNUXS+IZoVYsx0syGGo7dViLK d19U5oaBV9q9/uQyVEwb69Q8mT/RIzJBiNHRaMzOBMreq4QsBDK1UK29wf3nUTdHchBg T/bllUb0yhXoiI7HUBuou9ki74bNo1N1wZBPjX0dCecYbkX27WmLcxZAMfyZX7sLRPdw LwbCrZoKWlhoaQ4ZzrRHh9krad35Qj9BaUqgyRcaIjetIqwclbJi7njCpNAWklAWEzg5 QHXA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532TaF5Su3JY1hDijoXDhNoeqN+rF3nMGz/N3pDF3CBK/EuXqZTi /pQyo88qthqiqff9ryO5NXXto8rwnjweJdemjIg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzTdLWqn2qmS3z5Sd0C9UTQQyf5OG4DF/8UTLeUwBWOlvnAZ0DTNUOBCG62Udyb9o0OAQ1mhNaBny32AcpeeB4= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:dbd0:: with SMTP id yc16mr37668973ejb.71.1616016589015; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 14:29:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210317203335.GA5249@naleco.com> In-Reply-To: <20210317203335.GA5249@naleco.com> From: Henry Bent Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 17:29:40 -0400 Message-ID: To: Josh Good Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bd4ebd05bdc22eac" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Surprised about Unix System V in the 80's - so sparse! 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 Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000bd4ebd05bdc22eac Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 at 16:52, Josh Good wrote: > > And that's it. The communications part only deals the Micnet (a serial-port > based local networking scheme), and UUCP. No mention at all of the words > "Internet" or "TCP/IP", no even in the Index. > Not a total surprise. In 1988, the average home user had probably barely even heard of the internet. Even business users were only concerned with on-site networking, and that was a fairly expensive proposition. > In truth, I fail to see what was the appeal of such a system, for mere > users, when in the same PC you could run rich DOS-based applications like > WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, Ventura Publisher and all the PC software from > those years. > Indeed, from the perspective of a home user you didn't really need an expensive UNIX box to do normal household chores. I was more than happy with a Visual 1050 running CP/M (and Wordstar, Multiplan, etc.) well into the late '80s. > I mean, mail without Internet is pretty useless, althouhg I understand it > could be useful for inter-company communications. And yes, it had vi and > the > Bourne Shell. But still, it feels very very limited, this Xenix version, > from a user's point of view. > Which might well explain why Xenix failed to gain much ground with normal folks at home. If you used a UNIX at work, sure, you might want to pay the money to have it at home. But why spend the $ for an operating system that didn't have widespread application development? > > I'm probably spoiled from Linux having repositories full of packaged free > software, where the user just has to worry about "which is the best of": > email program, text editor, browser, image manipulation program, video > player, etc. I understand this now pretty well, how spoiled are we these > days. > The proliferation of free software is practically unthinkable from the standpoint of a home user 30 years ago. -Henry --000000000000bd4ebd05bdc22eac Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 at 16:52, Josh Good &= lt;pepe@naleco.com> wrote:

And that's it. The communications part only deals the Micnet (a serial-= port
based local networking scheme), and UUCP. No mention at all of the words "Internet" or "TCP/IP", no even in the Index.

Not a total surprise.=C2=A0 In 1988, the average= home user had probably barely even heard of the internet.=C2=A0 Even busin= ess users were only concerned with on-site networking, and that was a fairl= y expensive proposition.
=C2=A0
In truth, I fail to see what was the appeal of such a system, for mere
users, when in the same PC you could run rich DOS-based applications like WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, Ventura Publisher and all the PC software from those years.

Indeed, from the perspecti= ve of a home user you didn't really need an expensive UNIX box to do no= rmal household chores.=C2=A0 I was more than happy with a Visual 1050 runni= ng CP/M (and Wordstar, Multiplan, etc.) well into the late '80s.
=C2=A0
I mean, mail without Internet is pretty useless, althouhg I understand it could be useful for inter-company communications. And yes, it had vi and th= e
Bourne Shell. But still, it feels very very limited, this Xenix version, from a user's point of view.

Which = might well explain why Xenix failed to gain much ground with normal folks a= t home.=C2=A0 If you used a UNIX at work, sure, you might want to pay the m= oney to have it at home.=C2=A0 But why spend the $ for an operating system = that didn't have widespread application development?
=C2= =A0

I'm probably spoiled from Linux having repositories full of packaged fr= ee
software, where the user just has to worry about "which is the best of= ":
email program, text editor, browser, image manipulation program, video
player, etc. I understand this now pretty well, how spoiled are we these days.

The proliferation of free softwar= e is practically unthinkable from the standpoint of a home user 30 years ag= o.

-Henry
--000000000000bd4ebd05bdc22eac--