[HECnet] Tops-20 ANONYMOUS FAL Preliminary Testing Results/DAP Query

[Thomas DeBellis]

That is an extremely difficult question to answer; they all had their 
quirks and advantages, which is not surprising given that they targeted 
very different markets.  As a whole, I would say that the quality of 
DEC's documentation was the same on all the platforms; I found it easier 
to wade through than IBM's VM/CMS docs.

In terms of raw capacity, probably the later mainframe operating systems 
would be the best choice as these most approximate what is available 
today on commercial platforms (with the clear exception of the graphics 
interface).  What matters is the address space and functionality:

 1. VMS started out on a 32 bit platform as a high super-mini computer. 
    DEC soon grew this into low mainframe class with the VAX 8650
    series, the Alpha being a completely modern platform. VMS is an
    acquired taste; some people think DCL is great and others...
 2. Tops-10 started as a mainframe platform and was eventually rewritten
    to have symmetric multi-processing.  The command interface is simple
    enough.  The process paradigm is limited in that there is a
    one-to-one mapping of one process per job.  The address space had
    been limited to 256K, but I think they may have done Extended
    Addressing.  I believe TCP/IP may have been available from a 3rd
    party vendor.
 3. Tops-20 is more modern, having a multi-process per job architecture
    and a 30 bit address space.  Many Unix programs are easily ported. 
    It ran the most networking protocols, including TCP/IP.  It is quite
    easy to learn due to the COMND% interface, which provides
    completions, guiding, prompting and recognition. There was a time
    when there were more of these systems on the ARPAnet then Unix.  I
    have been looking to write an IP6 interface after I complete some
    more items on my To Do list.

But the mini-computer operating systems are just plain cool.  It is 
amazing what they squeezed into the PDP-8's 12 bit address space and 
PDP-11's run some of the most interesting collection of OS's that I've 
ever seen.

It really all depends on what you feel like playing with; it's a 
profitable learning experience all around.

>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> On 12/20/19 7:07 PM, Bill Cunningham wrote:
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> On 12/20/2019 5:44 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> On 2019-12-20 23:00, Paul Koning wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> On Dec 20, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Lee Gleason <lee.gleason at comcast.net> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> -----Original Message----- Do I have any volunteers who operate 
>>>>> something besides VMS?  I'd be interested in RSX(+), IAS, RSTS and 
>>>>> OS-8.  They never did DECnet on RT-11, did they?
>>>> If you run across anyone with DECET-IAS, please let me know...
>>> Did that exist?  I'm fairly sure it did.  What about DECnet for 
>>> RSX-11/D?  Not so sure about that one.
>> Both existed. See the spd at http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/spd/
>>
>>   Johnny
>>
> Nice link! Tell me if one OS was going to be learned, I would like 
> anyone out there who knows, what would it be? RSX RT DECnet VMS or 
> what? Taking into consideration, easiness to learn because it would 
> take some time. And Availability or modernized tools like VMS has of 
> example, TCP/IP.
>
> Bill
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sonic.net/pipermail/hecnet-list/attachments/20191220/910baf86/attachment.html>