Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!tgr!ron@BRL-TGR From: ron@BRL-TGR (Ron Natalie) Newsgroups: net.unix Subject: Re: Re: IBM to support UNIX on 4300 Message-ID: <8600@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Mon, 25-Feb-85 12:12:17 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.8600 Posted: Mon Feb 25 12:12:17 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 28-Feb-85 12:28:31 EST Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA Lines: 33 I don't know where this piece of crap came from. There was a standalone version of UNIX for the IBM 370. It was done by ripping apart an existing IBM operating system and glueing a UNIX kernel to it. This has not been available to Joe IBM-owner. The reason people have implemented no fewer than 3 UNIX's for 370's under VM, is that you'd be stupid not to. 1. It's easier to do that way. 2. IBM correctly percieves that many sites that buy UNIX would also still want the more traditional IBM operating systems at the same time for compatibility. 3. Why not. First, I can't see any of the UNIVERSITIES that I know that are currently using IBM's, that would want it native. As a matter of fact, if it were only available native, they probably wouldn't switch. Second, I percieve a problem you are having with VM. Running UNIX under VM is not like running UNIX under VMS. VM is not a full blown operating system in itself but a system for handling the low level I/O and user protection (or should I say isolation) problems. One of the big indicators is that CP has very few commands. If you are going to run on an IBM mainframe, being under VM is probably the only way to go. The obstacles for a native O/S are substantial. Finally, does anyone know how much of IX/370 is being handled by IBM itself, howmuch is being done by Inactive Systems, and how much is being done by other people. From the product announcements it would seem that it doesn't reek as much of Santa Monica as PC/IX does. -Ron