Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!ames!ptsfa!dmt
From: dmt@ptsfa.UUCP (Dave Turner)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Historical correction (was Re: Horizontal pipelining)
Message-ID: <3809@ptsfa.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 24-Nov-87 11:46:41 EST
Article-I.D.: ptsfa.3809
Posted: Tue Nov 24 11:46:41 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 27-Nov-87 23:15:27 EST
References: <201@PT.CS.CMU.EDU> <388@sdcjove.CAM.UNISYS.COM>
Reply-To: dmt@ptsfa.UUCP (Dave Turner)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Lines: 36
Keywords: multiple users

In article <18624@amdahl.amdahl.com> esf00@amdahl.amdahl.com (Elliott S. Frank) writes:
>In article <3801@ptsfa.UUCP> dmt@ptsfa.UUCP (Dave Turner) writes:
>
>>>In article <988@edge.UUCP> doug@edge.UUCP (Doug Pardee) writes:
>>>>OS/MFT became (was the basis for) OS/VS1.  OS/MVT was the basis for OS/VS2.
>>>>Release 2 of OS/VS2 was the first MVS.  Inevitably, OS/VS2 Release 1 became
>>>>known to history as SVS.
>>
>>I thought that OS/VS1 was called SVS.
>>
>        OS/VS/2 Release 1 == SVS (Single Virtual System == 24-bit virtual
>
>        OS/VS/2 Release 2 == MVS (Multiple Virtual Spaces == created
>

Thank you for clearing up my memory.

But my point was that initially IBM did not sanction the use of MVS and SVS
for the releases 2 and 1 of OS/VS2. It was over a year after I saw references
to MVS and SVS in magazines before IBM finally accepted them.














-- 
Dave Turner	415/542-1299	{ihnp4,lll-crg,qantel,pyramid}!ptsfa!dmt