Windows Rant

chris chevhq at gmail.com
Mon Jul 12 01:44:35 UTC 2010


On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 17:36 -0500, C de-Avillez wrote: 
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:22:08 +1200
> chris <chevhq at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > late 60's, we were putting together breadboard circuits and writing
> > our own operating systems. It was an occasion for a beer if we got
> > anything to boot.
> > I remember in 1960, the first mainframe coming in NZ, for the
> > government.  An early IBM second hand.  Can't remember the specks now,
> > but I think my first Sanyo AT had more main memory.
> > One of my mates went to the States to learn to programme for it.  A
> > quite difficult version of unix, but I could be wrong about that.
> > Seem to recall, it wasn't long after that that Fortran and Cobol
> > started to appear.
> 
> It ran OS/360 (no /360 or /370 ever ran UNIX, AFAICR); later on /360s
> started to run MFT and MVT; from this point on we started the road to
> the current zOS/MVS and OS/VS1 (which, I think, were still used a few
> years ago). It is said that at the core of zOS you can still see an
> emulator for the earlier IBM machines (I do not even remember their
> code anymore, 703?). And yes, usually you would have a (very) few
> hundred KBytes of main memory -- between 100 and 300K). And these were
> the systems we called 'mainframes' at the time, requiring massive power
> and cooling and quite some racks.
> 
> Fortran and Cobol come from the 1950s-early 60s.
> 
> But, anyway, there was no machine with 16MBytes of main memory in the
> 60s -- and if it did exist, it would have costed a quite some million
> dollars, just for the memory.

Yes, this was about 55 58 somewhere around their.
Getting old now
cheers the kiwi 





More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list