So-called "inanimate" devices can sense when it's the most inopportune time to fail, and do so at that time.
-
@larsbrinkhoff
I was referring to DEC’s Timesharing Operating System-10 (TOPS-10) OS that ran on the DECsystem-10 (PDP-10). I know very little about the “Total Operations Processing System” of British Rail. In fact, my knowledge of TOPS-10 and PDP-10 are almost as sparse, too. I grew up on the later generation DECs: the PDP-11/70 running 6th Edition and the VAX-11/780 running 4.2BSD. And I disliked the VMS that my uni ran on its VAX 8000 family of superminis.It is fair to label me as having a limited (biased) view on OSs.
-
@larsbrinkhoff @AmenZwa @alderson
I was pretty disappointed when TOPS evolved (devolved?) into being just a file-sharing utility for the Macintosh.
How the mighty have fallen! -
@larsbrinkhoff @AmenZwa @alderson
I was pretty disappointed when TOPS evolved (devolved?) into being just a file-sharing utility for the Macintosh.
How the mighty have fallen!Worse than that, it also morphed into British Rail’s rolling stock management system Total Operations Processing System.
-
Quite right, @larsbrinkhoff. Soon, the cognoscenti will be moving back to the old favourite OSs, like TOPS, MULTICS, OS/360, etc., complete with the old favourite mainframes of the eras, reimplemented on tiny FPGAs. Even such a drastic retrenchment probably will not be a long term safe place against intrusion. And like @brouhaha said, there will be a PencilOS one day, robbing us of our only current safe place—pencil-and-paper.
We have run out of places in which to hide from the TechBro Digital Overlords.
@AmenZwa @larsbrinkhoff @brouhaha
What did “TOPS” run on?
DEC had 2 mainframe operating systems for the PDP-10 family, Tops-10 and TOPS-20, which did nor share a single line of code, and were always referred to by their full names.
-
@AmenZwa @larsbrinkhoff @brouhaha
What did “TOPS” run on?
DEC had 2 mainframe operating systems for the PDP-10 family, Tops-10 and TOPS-20, which did nor share a single line of code, and were always referred to by their full names.
@alderson
Like I said, I’ve only ever smelled the TOPS-10 a couple of times, from a distance through a VT-100. The PDP-10 at my uni was guarded jealously by a select few. And we didn’t have TOPS-20.Most in my department lived on our own VAX-11/780, on which we ran the 4.2BSD.
I also said I have a rather limited, lopsided view on OSs.
I referenced TOPS, MULTICS, etc., in the context of a joke about Internet privacy—or the lack thereof, these days.
-
@larsbrinkhoff ITS, I'm guessing? Incompatible is right in the name. @AmenZwa @brouhaha
-
@larsbrinkhoff ITS, I'm guessing? Incompatible is right in the name. @AmenZwa @brouhaha
@0x0ddc0ffee @AmenZwa @brouhaha Indeed ITS was on my mind. It seems a system that is a pretty safe haven.
-
@0x0ddc0ffee @AmenZwa @brouhaha Indeed ITS was on my mind. It seems a system that is a pretty safe haven.
@larsbrinkhoff @0x0ddc0ffee @AmenZwa @brouhaha
Of course, moderns don’t usually know what the “Incompatible” in ITS actually refers to. At most, they might know about CTSS, the Compatible Time Sharing System, but what was it compatible *with*????IBM had created a FORTRAN run time package for the 70x family of computers. The design of the new timesharing system included as a goal allowing users to run existing software in the new mode.
-
@larsbrinkhoff @0x0ddc0ffee @AmenZwa @brouhaha
Of course, moderns don’t usually know what the “Incompatible” in ITS actually refers to. At most, they might know about CTSS, the Compatible Time Sharing System, but what was it compatible *with*????IBM had created a FORTRAN run time package for the 70x family of computers. The design of the new timesharing system included as a goal allowing users to run existing software in the new mode.
@alderson Thank you. As a late GenXer/Xennial, I've only ever used ITS in SIMH when I wanted to try MACLISP (not to be confused with MCL), and I'd only seen CTSS mentioned in dusty tomes of ancient lore.
I knew that CTSS was an early timesharing system, and I had the impression that it might have been less bad than an early attempt at a TSO by IBM, which was deemed deeply unsatisfactory to the various hackers, wizards, and future demigods lurking in AI labs of the time.
-
@0x0ddc0ffee @AmenZwa @brouhaha Indeed ITS was on my mind. It seems a system that is a pretty safe haven.
@larsbrinkhoff @AmenZwa @brouhaha Certainly, to someone who cut their teeth on SysV, ITS has a steep learning curve.
-
@larsbrinkhoff @AmenZwa @brouhaha Certainly, to someone who cut their teeth on SysV, ITS has a steep learning curve.
@0x0ddc0ffee @AmenZwa @brouhaha Sure, that's fair. ITS is an almost completely disjointed part of the design space. In my mind, this makes it more compelling, not less. But of course it takes effort to get to a place where you can enjoy the UX.
-
@0x0ddc0ffee @AmenZwa @brouhaha Sure, that's fair. ITS is an almost completely disjointed part of the design space. In my mind, this makes it more compelling, not less. But of course it takes effort to get to a place where you can enjoy the UX.
@0x0ddc0ffee @AmenZwa @brouhaha I will admit I have this condition that makes one-off timesharing systems irresistible to me. (Even more so if it's running on a one-of-a-kind machine as well.)
-
@0x0ddc0ffee @AmenZwa @brouhaha Sure, that's fair. ITS is an almost completely disjointed part of the design space. In my mind, this makes it more compelling, not less. But of course it takes effort to get to a place where you can enjoy the UX.
@larsbrinkhoff @AmenZwa @brouhaha I didn't mean to imply that a steep learning curve is a deal breaker. I'd love to dive back into ITS and MACLISP again, maybe once I'm done dealing with my late father's estate, found steady employment, moved, sold the house, and come to terms with the sudden, horrific loss of my closest friend in a way that made national news briefly, and kept resurfacing in local news for nearly two weeks. For now, I don't have the mental bandwidth.
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
