Trying to design low level hard disk manipulation program
|
From: jmfbahciv on 8 Oct 2006 07:57 In article <45289395$1(a)news.meer.net>, lindahl(a)pbm.com (Greg Lindahl) wrote: My apologees for my posts. I did not see the cross post until my finger clicker clacked. /BAH
From: Peter Flass on 8 Oct 2006 16:33 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > No it wasn't a swear. It was fine OS for minis. I have been > told by customers that they loved the philosophy of VMS w.r.t. > aiding and abetting users. Of course this user did not > have to endure VAX architecture but started using VMS on the > Alpha. I think it took until the Alpha to be able to do > VMS user requests efficiently (so the OS didn't get in the > way of the user's work). > I loved the VAX architecture. CICS may be out of fashion today, but IMHO the VAX was the ultimate programmer's architecture. You could pick exactly the instruction you wanted, and didn't have to code around missing features. The compilers took full advantage of the instruction set. The chip biz wasn't quite there yet, though. For the MicroVax DEC needed (I believe) a two-chip CPU, and then had to leave out instructions to be emulated in software. Today, of course, you could put several VAXen on a chip and have room to spare.
From: Ketil Malde on 9 Oct 2006 04:59 yankeeinexile(a)gmail.com writes: >>> All those file version numbers that ate up disk space. >> and saved your butt when [...] > If there was ONE user-visible feature from VMS that I wish would come > back, that would be it Any reason this could't be implemented with FUSE? -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
From: jmfbahciv on 9 Oct 2006 07:45 In article <ygdWg.58668$uH6.28316(a)twister.nyroc.rr.com>, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass(a)Yahoo.com> wrote: >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> No it wasn't a swear. It was fine OS for minis. I have been >> told by customers that they loved the philosophy of VMS w.r.t. >> aiding and abetting users. Of course this user did not >> have to endure VAX architecture but started using VMS on the >> Alpha. I think it took until the Alpha to be able to do >> VMS user requests efficiently (so the OS didn't get in the >> way of the user's work). >> > >I loved the VAX architecture. The architecture was fine; it was the OS implementation that sucked. > CICS may be out of fashion today, but >IMHO the VAX was the ultimate programmer's architecture. You could pick >exactly the instruction you wanted, and didn't have to code around >missing features. The compilers took full advantage of the instruction >set. The chip biz wasn't quite there yet, though. For the MicroVax >DEC needed (I believe) a two-chip CPU, and then had to leave out >instructions to be emulated in software. Today, of course, you could >put several VAXen on a chip and have room to spare. I still get culture shock when I think of that. I have a VAX in plastic that somebody gave JMF. I would have never thought that I could put a CPU on my fireplace mantle next to the liquid ball of snow. /BAH
From: Charlie Gibbs on 9 Oct 2006 16:06
In article <egdco1$8qk_013(a)s891.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com (jmfbahciv) writes: > I still get culture shock when I think of that. I have a > VAX in plastic that somebody gave JMF. I would have never > thought that I could put a CPU on my fireplace mantle next > to the liquid ball of snow. I had that happen when I built my IMSAI. The CPU chip that came with the kit was defective. (But only slightly - conditional return instructions were all unconditional, but aside from that it worked fine.) I went to the local supplier and asked for a replacement. The guy behind the counter went into the back and came out with a tube of CPU chips, shook one out, and handed it to me. A tube full of CPUs - now that was culture shock. -- /~\ cgibbs(a)kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign! |