The Perfect Computer - 36 bits?
|
From: jmfbahciv on 16 Mar 2007 09:21 In article <m3d539fie5.fsf(a)garlic.com>, Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn(a)garlic.com> wrote: >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >> There were many sane ways to move customers from the one product >> line to the other, IF that was a goal. The choice was the most >> insane method. This was part of the IBM thinking that was >> injected (sorry, Lynn) into middle management. IBM customers >> were used to being ordered around "for their own good". DEC >> customers had always been severely allergic to this kind of >> treatment; this allergy was why they bought DEC instead >> of IBM in the first place. > >don't apologize to me ... OK. >circa '90 and early 90s, picking up a bunch >of former middle managers ... was about when there were a significant >number of middle managers were let go as part of trying to "flatten" >the organizations. > >also the larger bureaucracy, the more you might have individuals >afflicted with Boyd's characterization about rigid, top/down >command and control ... recent posts >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#45 time spent/day on a computer >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#55 time spent/day on a computer But the question here isn't about style but why (or how) these managers assumed that customers could be dicated to as if they were subordinates. I am making the assumption that most managers knew that products were being made and sold to other people. I worked for one who didn't know. > >and as i've previously mentioned, there were quite a few that >I might not have been particularly partial to ... misc. references >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#22 MS to world: Stop sending money, we have enough >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#26 MS to world: Stop sending money, we have enough >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007b.html#29 How many 36-bit Unix ports in the old days >http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#48 time spent/day on a computer I just don't know how you and your wife stayed sane and managed to tiptoe through the mess, and make useful stuff. /BAH
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler on 16 Mar 2007 11:00 krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> writes: > ...and those managers (in the early '90s) were exactly the ones who > most needed flattening. DEC couldn't have done any worse with the > entire senior management team. They almost took IBM under. re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007f.html#23 The Perfect Computer - 36 bits? and you took a lot more heat if you were predicting such stuff in the mid-80s, a couple past posts http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#32 IBM Plugs Big Iron to the College Crowd http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#16 Is a Hurricane about to hit IBM ? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#21 IBM up for grabs? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#22 IBM up for grabs? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006l.html#17 virtual memory
From: John Ahlstrom on 16 Mar 2007 11:28 William Pechter wrote: > In article <krKdnQSmUp5irGfYnZ2dnUVZ_ujinZ2d(a)comcast.com>, > John Ahlstrom <AhlstromJK(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> Eugene Miya wrote: >>>>>>> backward compatibility >>>>> Well, let's see, when did VAX/VM come out? Some time in the latter 80s? >>>>> I'm sure the IBM VM/370 people were grinning at the time. >>> In article <MeSdnVgMNdXQ5mXYnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d(a)comcast.com>, >>> William Pechter <pechter(a)pechter.dyndns.org> wrote: >>>> VAX/VMS was somewhere around '79 or so. >>> VMS 1.0 was 1978/77 depending when you count. I saw a 780 at DECUS in >>> Anaheim in 1978. >>> >>>> It was in the 2.5 varient by '82. >>> Is that right? I thought the VAX Virtual Machine was later than that. >>> I.e., you could run VMS and Ultrix on the same hardware at the same time. >>> 82, STUG (The Software Tools User Group) was really started to take off. >>> 4.2BSD was a Fabry/Joy glimmer, and TCP was a couple years away. >>> ANd we were getting an 11/782 and LLNL a 11/784 (which we late upgraded >>> to, and I think the whole count for MA780s was 5). >>> Ames, LLNL, CMU, DEC, and 1 more. CSU FC? Or a UK machine. I should >>> ask Sopka. >>> >> One of you - Pechter - is talking about Virtual Memory System. >> Eugene is talking about Virtual Machine. >> Did VAX Virtual Machine ever get into a product? >> >> JKA > > Never heard of any VAX Virtual Machine through my tenure at Dec in '87. > > Eunice was a Wallongong product that let 4.1 (IIRC) BSD run on top of > VAX/VMS. > > Bill > See: Virtualizing the VAX architecture Preliminary Design of a VAX-I1 Virtual Machine Monitor Security Kernel. Technical Report DEC TR-126, Digital Equipment Corporation, Hudson, MA, ... portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=115952.115990 - Similar pages A Retrospective on the VAX VMM Security Kernel 45 {45} P. A. Karger, "Preliminary design of a VAX-11 virtual machine monitor security kernel," Digital Equip. Corp., Hudson, MA, Tech. Rep. ... portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&id=123459 - Similar pages [ More results from portal.acm.org ]
From: Paul Repacholi on 16 Mar 2007 09:54 pechter(a)pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) writes: > Never heard of any VAX Virtual Machine through my tenure at Dec in > '87. VVMS ran on Nautalii CPUs and was never seen outside the lab. It reputadly was Orange Book `A' secure.
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler on 16 Mar 2007 11:47
John Ahlstrom <AhlstromJK(a)comcast.net> writes: > See: > > Virtualizing the VAX architecture > Preliminary Design of a VAX-I1 Virtual Machine Monitor Security > Kernel. Technical Report DEC TR-126, Digital Equipment Corporation, > Hudson, MA, ... > portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=115952.115990 - Similar pages > > > A Retrospective on the VAX VMM Security Kernel > 45 {45} P. A. Karger, "Preliminary design of a VAX-11 virtual machine > monitor security kernel," Digital Equip. Corp., Hudson, MA, > Tech. Rep. ... > portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&id=123459 - Similar pages > [ More results from portal.acm.org ] may have been somewhat/totally coincidental ... but when POK convinced corporate that the vm370 development group (at the time, located in the old SBC bldg. in burlington mall) had to be shutdown (including the product) and everybody moved to POK help get MVS/XA out the door .... some number of people didn't moved ... and several round up at DEC (workng on what was to become vax/vms) Endicott managed to salvage some of the mission and keep the product from totally being canceled. a few recent posts mentioning the event: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#23 How to write a full-screen Rexx debugger? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#41 IBM S/360 series operating systems history http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007f.html#14 more shared segment archeology |