From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-09 08:01:58 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!lon1-news.nildram.net!195.149.20.147.MISMATCH!mercury.nildram.co.uk!not-for-mail Message-ID: <$6bcHXAHL8u+EwUP@nildram.co.uk> Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 16:01:27 +0100 From: Tom Welsh Reply-To: Tom Welsh Sender: Tom Welsh Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc Subject: Re: Using Ada for device drivers? (Was: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died) References: <9fa75d42.0304230424.10612b1a@posting.google.com> <82347202.0305021418.4719da45@posting.google.com> <9fa75d42.0305060521.400f1d80@posting.google.com> <82347202.0305061103.2ddd98e4@posting.google.com> <9fa75d42.0305070504.6866e7a3@posting.google.com> <9fa75d42.0305070929.2d7a0d4c@posting.google.com> <9fa75d42.0305081222.623e0b31@posting.google.com> <9fa75d42.0305090518.513731f4@posting.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 5.01 U NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.208.100.157 X-Trace: 1052492517 mercury.nildram.net 45185 213.208.100.157 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:63397 comp.object:63093 comp.lang.ada:37109 misc.misc:14042 Date: 2003-05-09T16:01:27+01:00 List-Id: In article <9fa75d42.0305090518.513731f4@posting.google.com>, soft-eng writes > >But there was the Ultrix group at DEC -- and DEC should have >been the least concerned of all companies about Unix. >That's because BSD was developed on Vax machines, and people >using Unix bought Vax machines to run it on. So >Unix was free, but people bought Vax hardware >from DEC so they could throw away VMS and run Unix on it! > It's more a case of "then there was the Ultrix group at DEC". In the manner of dominant vendors, DEC was extremely reluctant to believe that customers could prefer an "alien" product - still more, one written by hackers in their spare time (as DEC saws it) and given away free or as good as. Same response MS had to open source, really. So Ultrix was only launched (or at least, supported from the top) once the Unix breakthrough was well developed. But it was *never* loved. In fact, at one point a bit later on there were three corporate camps supporting VMS, Unix and Windows respectively. (I know Windows has never run on VAX - it's a long and tedious tale of pointy-haired folk). >That changed as Sun started becoming popular, though, >which might have been when your problems with >Unix must have gotten really serious! Exactly. But Ken Olsen and his smarter executives could see that coming as soon as Unix became popular. Cheap software - expensive hardware - duh! -- Tom Welsh