Subject: Re: Nostalgic blathering (deleteme)... - DELETE ME TOO!!! Especially!!
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@isc.org>
From: Bob Pearson <bobp@sevenofnine.erols.com>
List: tech-kern
Date: 01/29/2000 17:22:14
--------------2F1673F8C552B52FD0E88E43
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ted Lemon wrote:
> > Well, I dare say we're just about here -- any takers?
>
> Just about to Multics? Oh, I don't think so. We do some things
> much better, but Multics had some design features that we've never
> even considered, from what I understand, that are kind of a big deal.
> Wasn't Multics kind of a "one solution, done right" operating system?
>
> _MelloN_
Yes, exactly.
Actually, its designers had the idea of a "computer utility" ala
the power utility or gas utility model. It was designed with
security in mind so that theoretically, AMC and GM could work on
the same computer without worries of the the other company being
able to access the others data. Its vision was the opposite of
the forthcoming minicomputer/microcomputer revolution. This was
the hey day of mainframes!! That is, it envisioned Boston having
a single Multics system "computer utility", Philadelphia having
its own, etc.
It was designed to handle many of the problems in Operating Systems
at the time. It strove for technical excellence and purity. Many
hackers (old meaning) looked at it as totally brain damaged (though
I was a big fan). The power of Multics was provided by the
correct/elegant use of hardware segmentation and paging and the use
of rings (with only ring 0 being able to execute privileged
instructions). It was WAY ahead for its time, with all secondary
storage being directly processor addressable (with the assistance
of the operating system) and the use of "dynamic binding". Today's
Intel i386 and successors also posses gates, rings, segmentation and
paging but I haven't seen them used in the Multics sense.
NetBSD does not make the hardware assumptions that Multics did.
Multics required special hardware to be built to run it. (GE 635
to GE 645 to the GE 647 with a hardware TLB and eventually hardware
ring registers).
NetBSD is built to be as portable to different architectures as
possible.
The Multics project ala Project MAC had the designers of Unix in
it until AT&T Bell Laboratories withdrew from Project MAC in 1969,
hence the name Unix, a pun on a castrated Multics. MAC stood for
either Machine Aided Cognition or Man And Computer depending on
who you talk to, it start with CTSS (Compatible TimeSharing
System and evolved to Multics. ITS, Incompatible Timesharing
System, poked fun at CTSS in its name).
Multics actually stood for MULTiplexed Information and Computing
Service [ okay, so they cheated on the ULT :-) ].
It remains an interesting thing, but only historically. NetBSD
has lots going for it and has the best mascot in the world! ;-)
<FLAMEBAIT>
I'd never get a Linux Penguin for a tattoo ... Penguins defecated
in their own nests and stink REAL BAD.
</FLAMEBAIT>
Enough geezing and partisan rhetoric for the weekend. We now return
you to the real purpose of this list...
--
"i am unique and special, just like everyone else"
bob pearson bobp@sevenofnine.erols.com
--------------2F1673F8C552B52FD0E88E43
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<tt>Ted Lemon wrote:</tt>
<blockquote TYPE=CITE><tt>> Well, I dare say we're just about here -- any
takers?</tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt>Just about to Multics? Oh, I don't think so.
We do some things</tt>
<br><tt>much better, but Multics had some design features that we've never</tt>
<br><tt>even considered, from what I understand, that are kind of a big
deal.</tt>
<br><tt>Wasn't Multics kind of a "one solution, done right" operating system?</tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt>
_MelloN_</tt></blockquote>
<tt>Yes, exactly.</tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt>Actually, its designers had the idea of a "computer utility" ala</tt>
<br><tt>the power utility or gas utility model. It was designed with</tt>
<br><tt>security in mind so that theoretically, AMC and GM could work on</tt>
<br><tt>the same computer without worries of the the other company being</tt>
<br><tt>able to access the others data. Its vision was the opposite
of</tt>
<br><tt>the forthcoming minicomputer/microcomputer revolution. This
was</tt>
<br><tt>the hey day of mainframes!! That is, it envisioned Boston having</tt>
<br><tt>a single Multics system "computer utility", Philadelphia having</tt>
<br><tt>its own, etc.</tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt>It was designed to handle many of the problems in Operating Systems</tt>
<br><tt>at the time. It strove for technical excellence and purity.
Many</tt>
<br><tt>hackers (old meaning) looked at it as totally brain damaged (though</tt>
<br><tt>I was a big fan). The power of Multics was provided by the</tt>
<br><tt>correct/elegant use of hardware segmentation and paging and the
use</tt>
<br><tt>of rings (with only ring 0 being able to execute privileged</tt>
<br><tt>instructions). It was WAY ahead for its time, with all secondary</tt>
<br><tt>storage being directly processor addressable (with the assistance</tt>
<br><tt>of the operating system) and the use of "dynamic binding".
Today's</tt>
<br><tt>Intel i386 and successors also posses gates, rings, segmentation
and</tt>
<br><tt>paging but I haven't seen them used in the Multics sense.</tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt>NetBSD does not make the hardware assumptions that Multics did.</tt>
<br><tt>Multics required special hardware to be built to run it. (GE 635</tt>
<br><tt>to GE 645 to the GE 647 with a hardware TLB and eventually hardware</tt>
<br><tt>ring registers).</tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt>NetBSD is built to be as portable to different architectures as</tt>
<br><tt>possible.</tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt>The Multics project ala Project MAC had the designers of Unix in</tt>
<br><tt>it until AT&T Bell Laboratories withdrew from Project MAC in
1969,</tt>
<br><tt>hence the name Unix, a pun on a castrated Multics. MAC stood
for</tt>
<br><tt>either Machine Aided Cognition or Man And Computer depending on</tt>
<br><tt>who you talk to, it start with CTSS (Compatible TimeSharing</tt>
<br><tt>System and evolved to Multics. ITS, Incompatible Timesharing</tt>
<br><tt>System, poked fun at CTSS in its name).</tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt>Multics actually stood for MULTiplexed Information and Computing</tt>
<br><tt>Service [ okay, so they cheated on the ULT :-) ].</tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt>It remains an interesting thing, but only historically. NetBSD</tt>
<br><tt>has lots going for it and has the best mascot in the world! ;-)</tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt><FLAMEBAIT></tt>
<br><tt>I'd never get a Linux Penguin for a tattoo ... Penguins defecated</tt>
<br><tt>in their own nests and stink REAL BAD.</tt>
<br><tt></FLAMEBAIT></tt><tt></tt>
<p><tt>Enough geezing and partisan rhetoric for the weekend. We now
return</tt>
<br><tt>you to the real purpose of this list...</tt>
<pre><tt>--
"i am unique and special, just like everyone else"
bob pearson bobp@sevenofnine.erols.com</tt></pre>
</html>
--------------2F1673F8C552B52FD0E88E43--