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_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 20086 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2023 01:05:04 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (2600:3c01:e000:146::1) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 21 Oct 2023 01:05:04 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600AF4241D; Sat, 21 Oct 2023 11:04:59 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-yb1-xb30.google.com (mail-yb1-xb30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b30]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 960CA4241B for ; Sat, 21 Oct 2023 11:04:53 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-yb1-xb30.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-d9b9adaf291so1364467276.1 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 18:04:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1697850292; x=1698455092; darn=tuhs.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=zUPD4fEg/KmKSTc8wAO/lFfd4sNdD9z9/u142xPQ5gk=; b=R1LbevRB7jK+vKmRhbgKeIsj4D3sWuUpaRTvPBGMgVcRYZsrcme2/zd8NnvM/3Txin q2i7sUKR/YmWlNSwaLZAXnkxDugl7qGI7pMEtIteZ5eyFXDDAP7sjU/jtj6Prg/tNObh QYVTk0ECJlI6wZbGFIwAby4RTqpoaz+PfVJ1kXG2/GrJ45dt0D51nLc5n9fY6Az2I6Eq /kFgFEDNbz6Uf5sPCEKrvCBMhhNKe1KpJj/zLb1G99o0MQEX7YxykkHi1i+rFOCNtFI8 7qOFhqq4dPGpo3wBsoLbBacG4MWUZBHSrYlKA3S1HzKmN3Pl4Qv/AmRvB/cIgMn9U+p/ Eu8Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697850292; x=1698455092; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=zUPD4fEg/KmKSTc8wAO/lFfd4sNdD9z9/u142xPQ5gk=; b=v8Oa7ksge76vPxJ4ZX+ffll8Ri6hvW/j7eR4qfVbn+HqkRFSay8f3+sD6A7UrEIGUT UNveT3O8oaoF0s0ssh8hsuCgiphABLPS9FqznsBYah4vRQcI6c2D/bHgBhQv76ma3e0i bJ7UMpMOpAbfyFfMoZ3B8Jw25nr+IYNTXEBvEE+ZQdiT1OTVM/7p8EeEGVwlt6qQqY+i dUGO6bbckfzaOpLiC9QKSnIxkZvm70AHca3DQzOR2IJ3G2V/dR7oDaqlU/FuzKNz9hQ9 XfjtV0Lz0It8A8VCjPy4L1K397Vhy412RJrxad1aB+uonkBUgu2ZecKT02c4Cc4dUt7p 6Dyg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywvq+iC/359wNvcq7V3x8M61Tqr1uFAL8sqUjls610dC1RlCR9E WxB72ZGMMW4fLA/xs10N0PYat7rGNTYh3S8XmmFfgCRN X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEQ+FcBGV9r623zLb2283X3An9IlVH6qoEp8r2ofKl9+MInY+KV1RDE+IWIzuF6lkgkOW6nIAq7UgCPKUuRQZ8= X-Received: by 2002:a25:7495:0:b0:d9a:6c74:49b with SMTP id p143-20020a257495000000b00d9a6c74049bmr3920596ybc.2.1697850292201; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 18:04:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Jim Geist Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 19:04:42 -0600 Message-ID: To: Steve Nickolas Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008c6ef906082f935f" Message-ID-Hash: 47SW3VYNEBT4GSUNUQ4JMI3RM3ZGMBGI X-Message-ID-Hash: 47SW3VYNEBT4GSUNUQ4JMI3RM3ZGMBGI X-MailFrom: velocityboy@gmail.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: Dave Cutler recollection about Xenix List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --0000000000008c6ef906082f935f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Both of them were heavily influenced by DOS. Many of the same commands and switches from DOS still work today, and pre-powershell scripting is DOS batch files with lots of extensions added. On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 6:52=E2=80=AFPM Steve Nickolas = wrote: > On Sat, 21 Oct 2023, segaloco via TUHS wrote: > > > Something this brings back to mind that I always wonder about with > > Microsoft and their OS choices: So they went with Windows NT for their > > kernel, scraped the Windows environment off the top of DOS and dolloped > > it on top. Has there been any explanation over the years why they also > > decided to keep the MSDOS CLI interface? It's not like the NT kernel > > couldn't handle simple stuff like a UNIX-y shell, tools like grep and > > sed, etc. and Microsoft had code in Xenix they probably could've > > considered using for that. Was it not wanting to have any licensing > > questions by avoiding anything that smelled like Xenix at all? Or was > > the consumer base at the time that invested in the MSDOS environment > > that handing them a Bourne shell with some ubiquitous UNIX tools > > would've just been unworkable? Feels like a lost opportunity, they > > could've had their kernel and their desktop environment and still given > > folks a more robust CLI. Instead stuff like UWIN, Cygwin, etc. had to > > come along and fill the void. That was something I was hoping he'd talk > > about when I clicked, but I didn't catch anything particular about the > > CLI choice. > > They actually inherited the CLI from OS/2, didn't they? > > -uso. > --0000000000008c6ef906082f935f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Both of them were heavily influenced by DOS. Many of the s= ame commands and switches from DOS still work today, and pre-powershell scr= ipting is DOS batch files with lots of extensions added.

On Fri, Oct 20, 202= 3 at 6:52=E2=80=AFPM Steve Nickolas <usotsuki@buric.co> wrote:
On Sat, 21 Oct 2023, segaloco via TUHS wrote:

> Something this brings back to mind that I always wonder about with > Microsoft and their OS choices: So they went with Windows NT for their=
> kernel, scraped the Windows environment off the top of DOS and dollope= d
> it on top. Has there been any explanation over the years why they also=
> decided to keep the MSDOS CLI interface? It's not like the NT kern= el
> couldn't handle simple stuff like a UNIX-y shell, tools like grep = and
> sed, etc. and Microsoft had code in Xenix they probably could've <= br> > considered using for that. Was it not wanting to have any licensing > questions by avoiding anything that smelled like Xenix at all? Or was =
> the consumer base at the time that invested in the MSDOS environment <= br> > that handing them a Bourne shell with some ubiquitous UNIX tools
> would've just been unworkable? Feels like a lost opportunity, they=
> could've had their kernel and their desktop environment and still = given
> folks a more robust CLI. Instead stuff like UWIN, Cygwin, etc. had to =
> come along and fill the void. That was something I was hoping he'd= talk
> about when I clicked, but I didn't catch anything particular about= the
> CLI choice.

They actually inherited the CLI from OS/2, didn't they?

-uso.
--0000000000008c6ef906082f935f--