We have ended up in a world where UNIX and Windows have taken over, and
most people have never experienced anything else. Over the years,
though, many other system designs have come and gone, and some of those
systems have had neat ideas that were nevertheless not enough to
achieve commercial success. We will take you on a tour of a variety of
those systems, talking about what makes them special.
In particular, we'll discuss IBM i, with emphasis on the Single Level
Store, TIMI, and block terminals Interlisp, the Lisp Machine with the
interface of Smalltalk OpenGenera, with a unique approach to UI design
TRON, Japan's ambitious OS standard.

This is an hour-long watch, but I;m getting some coffee and snacks
ready this weekend. This seems like total OSNews bait.

https://www.osnews.com/story/135225/what-have-we-lost/
--
[s]
Internetado.
--- If we aren't supposed to eat animals, why are they made with meat ?

On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 21:05:47 -0300
"Bbslocal" <bbslocal@bbs.alt119.net> wrote:

> We have ended up in a world where UNIX and Windows have taken over

No, UNIX is almost dead when we talk about the spreading. The amount of
people using BSD, Solaris, HP-UX and AIX is much lower compared to the
amount of Linux machines.
Every Android device has a Linux kernel.

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:06:14 +0200
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 21:05:47 -0300
> "Bbslocal" <bbslocal@bbs.alt119.net> wrote:
>
> > We have ended up in a world where UNIX and Windows have taken over
>
> No, UNIX is almost dead when we talk about the spreading. The amount of
> people using BSD, Solaris, HP-UX and AIX is much lower compared to the
> amount of Linux machines.
> Every Android device has a Linux kernel.

I suspect that when the article
(www.osnews.com/story/135225/what-have-we-lost/ quoting the description of
www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RNbIEJvjUA) talks about Unix , it includes Linux. I
haven't watched the video but that's my guess. I certainly think Linux as
Unix. What matters for me is the programming environment rather than
certification and in that sense Linux counts as Unix.

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:28:49 -0000 (UTC)
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:

> I certainly think Linux as
> Unix. What matters for me is the programming environment rather than
> certification and in that sense Linux counts as Unix.

Ok, for that is is true, but often these terms are used otherwise.
I would count Linux to UNIX-like operating systems.

--
Gruß
Marco

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:06:14 +0200, Marco Moock wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 21:05:47 -0300 "Bbslocal" <bbslocal@bbs.alt119.net>
> wrote:
>
>> We have ended up in a world where UNIX and Windows have taken over
>
> No, UNIX is almost dead when we talk about the spreading. The amount of
> people using BSD, Solaris, HP-UX and AIX is much lower compared to the
> amount of Linux machines.
> Every Android device has a Linux kernel.

That's correct. Linux is merely a jumped up wannabe UNIX.

--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> wrote:
>On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:06:14 +0200, Marco Moock wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 21:05:47 -0300 "Bbslocal" <bbslocal@bbs.alt119.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We have ended up in a world where UNIX and Windows have taken over
>>
>> No, UNIX is almost dead when we talk about the spreading. The amount of
>> people using BSD, Solaris, HP-UX and AIX is much lower compared to the
>> amount of Linux machines.
>> Every Android device has a Linux kernel.
>
>That's correct. Linux is merely a jumped up wannabe UNIX.

Wannabe? It has both streams AND sockets!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Am 26 Aug 2022 14:08:25 -0000
schrieb kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey):

> Wannabe? It has both streams AND sockets!

True, but the GNU project means GNU is not UNIX, because it is just a
compatible rewrite. The Linux kernel has been added to it, but it isn't
UNIX too, it is just (mostly) compatible with it.

In comp.misc, Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
> schrieb kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey):
>> Wannabe? It has both streams AND sockets!
> True, but the GNU project means GNU is not UNIX, because it is just a
> compatible rewrite. The Linux kernel has been added to it, but it
> isn't UNIX too, it is just (mostly) compatible with it.

Alpine offers a complete non-Gnu Linux. Gnu just wants to be
self-important and put their name first.

(I don't know how much Android uses Gnu, but I suspect not much.)

Elijah
------
leans anti-Gnu, but likes the grep

Am Fri, 26 Aug 2022 19:19:51 -0000 (UTC)
schrieb Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com>:

> Alpine offers a complete non-Gnu Linux. Gnu just wants to be
> self-important and put their name first.
>
> (I don't know how much Android uses Gnu, but I suspect not much.)

I don't see a problem with the GNU project. They did and still do a lot
of work - for free and everybody has certain freedoms.

I know that the name dispute is nasty, but I can understand it a little
bit why they're doing it.

On 26 Aug 2022 11:44:26 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:06:14 +0200, Marco Moock wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 21:05:47 -0300 "Bbslocal" <bbslocal@bbs.alt119.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We have ended up in a world where UNIX and Windows have taken over
>>
>> No, UNIX is almost dead when we talk about the spreading. The amount of
>> people using BSD, Solaris, HP-UX and AIX is much lower compared to the
>> amount of Linux machines.
>> Every Android device has a Linux kernel.
>
> That's correct. Linux is merely a jumped up wannabe UNIX.

There is a reason why I like to refer them as "toynix" ...

--
"dated to the ninth"

Zecharia

In article <teapjq$kf1$1@dont-email.me>, Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:
>Am 26 Aug 2022 14:08:25 -0000
>schrieb kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey):
>
>> Wannabe? It has both streams AND sockets!
>
>True, but the GNU project means GNU is not UNIX, because it is just a
>compatible rewrite. The Linux kernel has been added to it, but it isn't
>UNIX too, it is just (mostly) compatible with it.

Linux has nothing to do with the GNU project except in that most Linux
distributions bundle in a lot of GNU software, as rms is so fond of telling
everyone.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 2022-08-27, Zecharia Sitchin <zsitchin@nibiru.planet> wrote:
> On 26 Aug 2022 11:44:26 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:06:14 +0200, Marco Moock wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 21:05:47 -0300 "Bbslocal" <bbslocal@bbs.alt119.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We have ended up in a world where UNIX and Windows have taken over
>>>
>>> No, UNIX is almost dead when we talk about the spreading. The amount of
>>> people using BSD, Solaris, HP-UX and AIX is much lower compared to the
>>> amount of Linux machines.
>>> Every Android device has a Linux kernel.
>>
>> That's correct. Linux is merely a jumped up wannabe UNIX.
>
> There is a reason why I like to refer them as "toynix" ...

I've never understood that attitude. Even 15-20 years ago when I was
employed as a sysadmin at a UK university, Linux was as robust and as
competent as any of the "proper" Unices that we ran, and it worked with
more hardware.

There is a reason why the worlds supercomputers are linux based, and why
most of the cloud and major web infrastructure is also predominantly
linux based. And why the ARM ecosphere is also Linux based.
Anything thats cuts across that lot is not a "toy".

I have a lot of respect for some of the BSDs - more so now with things
like systemd - but to an outsider like me, their development processes
seem a lot less open.

On 2022-08-26, Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:06:14 +0200, Marco Moock wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 21:05:47 -0300 "Bbslocal" <bbslocal@bbs.alt119.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We have ended up in a world where UNIX and Windows have taken over
>>
>> No, UNIX is almost dead when we talk about the spreading. The amount of
>> people using BSD, Solaris, HP-UX and AIX is much lower compared to the
>> amount of Linux machines.
>> Every Android device has a Linux kernel.
>
> That's correct. Linux is merely a jumped up wannabe UNIX.
>
>

Current Unix' vision it's plan9 (better embraced into 9front).

Unix as a philosphy is dead. Mac OSX it's a weird blend between
NeXTSTep and the classic Macintosh interface, and OpenBSD
began to put pledge and unveil. Very good, but plan9/9front's
namespaces and the "your PC it's a network" concept it's far
superior.

Also, I'd consider Acme a much better Emacs than Emacs, and a
proper conception for a visual editor as a step from ed/sam
instead of vi/nvi.
But, well, 9front guys fixed some concepts in sam, such as
allowing the user to switch into the command pane
with a keybinding, much faster than moving the mouse and
clicking/chording a command.

Under my OpenBSD machine, I use both the kbd and mouse with
cwm, too. I set the keybindg with the left super key and
the rest goes for keys reachable with the left hand, while I use
the mouse to move/resize the windows.

eMacs is the modern Lisp Machine. How is it not?

Oregonian Haruspex <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> eMacs is the modern Lisp Machine. How is it not?

I agree. But elisp, the dialect it uses, has its limitations.

Quoting from the elisp manual:

GNU Emacs Lisp is largely inspired by Maclisp, and a little by Common
Lisp. If you know Common Lisp, you will notice many similarities.
However, many features of Common Lisp have been omitted or simplified in
order to reduce the memory requirements of GNU Emacs. Sometimes the
simplifications are so drastic that a Common Lisp user might be very
confused. We will occasionally point out how GNU Emacs Lisp differs
from Common Lisp. If you don’t know Common Lisp, don’t worry about it;
this manual is self-contained.

A certain amount of Common Lisp emulation is available via the
‘cl-lib’ library. *Note Overview: (cl)Top.

Perhaps somebody who has worked with real lisp machines can comment further.

Javier [2022-09-12 14:27:48] wrote:
> Oregonian Haruspex <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> eMacs is the modern Lisp Machine. How is it not?
>
> I agree. But elisp, the dialect it uses, has its limitations.
>
> Quoting from the elisp manual:
>
> GNU Emacs Lisp is largely inspired by Maclisp, and a little by Common
> Lisp. If you know Common Lisp, you will notice many similarities.
> However, many features of Common Lisp have been omitted or simplified in
> order to reduce the memory requirements of GNU Emacs. Sometimes the
> simplifications are so drastic that a Common Lisp user might be very
> confused. We will occasionally point out how GNU Emacs Lisp differs
> from Common Lisp. If you don’t know Common Lisp, don’t worry about it;
> this manual is self-contained.
>
> A certain amount of Common Lisp emulation is available via the
> ‘cl-lib’ library. *Note Overview: (cl)Top.
>
> Perhaps somebody who has worked with real lisp machines can comment further.

Nowadays most of the language-level functionality of Lisp Machines is
available in ELisp either "in the core" or via libraries that are
bundled with Emacs.

What is lacking is the lower-level support, i.e. the ability to hack
on the internals without leaving the Lisp world: in Emacs, a lot of the
lower-level details are written in C.

Stefan

On 9/12/2022 8:27 AM, Javier wrote:
> Oregonian Haruspex <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> eMacs is the modern Lisp Machine. How is it not?
>
> I agree. But elisp, the dialect it uses, has its limitations.
>
> Quoting from the elisp manual:
>
> GNU Emacs Lisp is largely inspired by Maclisp, and a little by Common
> Lisp. If you know Common Lisp, you will notice many similarities.
> However, many features of Common Lisp have been omitted or simplified in
> order to reduce the memory requirements of GNU Emacs. Sometimes the
> simplifications are so drastic that a Common Lisp user might be very
> confused. We will occasionally point out how GNU Emacs Lisp differs
> from Common Lisp. If you don’t know Common Lisp, don’t worry about it;
> this manual is self-contained.
>
> A certain amount of Common Lisp emulation is available via the
> ‘cl-lib’ library. *Note Overview: (cl)Top.
>
> Perhaps somebody who has worked with real lisp machines can comment further.
One thing I miss entirely was the Symbolics keyboard: layout, action,
and integration with Lisp. Another thing lacking in most (if not all)
modern Lisp providers is robustness. We had one Lisp machine that was
used as a development machine as well as the namespace server for about
8-10 other machines. In one stretch it was up, continuously, for a
little over two years - the computer room was shut down for some
electronics work over the Xmas holiday and that capped the uptime. Since
the machine "OS" was build in the same language and shared flavor
(latter CL objects) you could do almost anything without leaving the
Lisp abstraction. It felt clumsy returning to the world were Emacs was
twisted in; slimy you might say.
--
Jeff Barnett

steve g <sgonedes1977@gmail.com> writes:

> I still have a symbolics from 1986. it runs fine. ...
> If you want pictures let me know she is awesome but old.

Like these?

https://www.ifis.uni-luebeck.de/~moeller/symbolics-info/family.html

-- HASM