Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > BIOS Reaching Its Limits

Reply
Thread Tools

BIOS Reaching Its Limits

 
 
Matty F
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2010
On Aug 12, 4:13 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> In message
> <(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F
> wrote:
>
> > I loathe command languages so no we didn't have anything like TECO.

>
> No programmable text-manipulation tools? Shame.


The business users wrote simple letters etc. Programmers wrote source
programs and made changes as necessary. Why would either of those want
or need programmable text-manipulation tools?

> But with no “command languages”, how did you issue your commands, then?


I think we are in different universes. What are examples of "commands"
that might be issued? I'm talking about ordinary commercial systems
and programming of the same. They used to be done in COBOL when I
started programming, apart from some horrible FORTRAN and some quite
good NCR program generators.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2010
In message
<(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F
wrote:

> On Aug 12, 4:13 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand>
> wrote:
>
>> In message
>> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> Matty F wrote:
>>
>> > I loathe command languages so no we didn't have anything like TECO.

>>
>> No programmable text-manipulation tools? Shame.

>
> The business users wrote simple letters etc. Programmers wrote source
> programs and made changes as necessary. Why would either of those want
> or need programmable text-manipulation tools?


To automate repetitive tasks.

>> But with no “command languages”, how did you issue your commands, then?

>
> I think we are in different universes. What are examples of "commands"
> that might be issued? I'm talking about ordinary commercial systems
> and programming of the same. They used to be done in COBOL when I
> started programming, apart from some horrible FORTRAN and some quite
> good NCR program generators.


Did you not have makefiles? Automated build systems?
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Matty F
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2010
On Aug 12, 9:41 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> In message
> <(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F
> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 12, 4:13 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand>
> > wrote:

>
> >> In message
> >> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> >> Matty F wrote:

>
> >> > I loathe command languages so no we didn't have anything like TECO.

>
> >> No programmable text-manipulation tools? Shame.

>
> > The business users wrote simple letters etc. Programmers wrote source
> > programs and made changes as necessary. Why would either of those want
> > or need programmable text-manipulation tools?

>
> To automate repetitive tasks.
>
> >> But with no “command languages”, how did you issue your commands, then?

>
> > I think we are in different universes. What are examples of "commands"
> > that might be issued? I'm talking about ordinary commercial systems
> > and programming of the same. They used to be done in COBOL when I
> > started programming, apart from some horrible FORTRAN and some quite
> > good NCR program generators.

>
> Did you not have makefiles? Automated build systems?


Certainly not. Why the heck would I want those? In the last system I
worked on, an application could typically have thousands of separately
compiled modules, although there was no real limit to the size of the
application.
A module could be compiled in a few seconds. No linking process was
needed. There was an option to automatically go to a test process
after the compile.
Like I said, we are in different computing universes. I'm not trying
to sell anything, but what we did worked extremely well for some 30
years and is still working.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Enkidu
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2010
On 12/08/10 21:41, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message
> <(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F
> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 12, 4:13 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro<(E-Mail Removed)_zealand>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>> Matty F wrote:
>>>
>>>> I loathe command languages so no we didn't have anything like TECO.
>>>
>>> No programmable text-manipulation tools? Shame.

>>
>> The business users wrote simple letters etc. Programmers wrote source
>> programs and made changes as necessary. Why would either of those want
>> or need programmable text-manipulation tools?

>
> To automate repetitive tasks.
>

Programs were simpler and any repetitive task is better programmed in
anyway.
>
>>> But with no “command languages”, how did you issue your commands, then?

>>
>> I think we are in different universes. What are examples of "commands"
>> that might be issued? I'm talking about ordinary commercial systems
>> and programming of the same. They used to be done in COBOL when I
>> started programming, apart from some horrible FORTRAN and some quite
>> good NCR program generators.

>
> Did you not have makefiles? Automated build systems?
>

Compile and link decks. In those days programs were smaller and the
overhead of recompiling everything was not high. Makefiles sprung out of
the need to compile everything and in particular the kernel (if an OS
had one) which is a different category of problem to compiling a program.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

The ends justifies the means - Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli.

The end excuses any evil - Sophocles
 
Reply With Quote
 
victor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2010
On 12/08/2010 11:11 p.m., Matty F wrote:
> On Aug 12, 9:41 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro<l...@geek-
> central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
>> In message
>> <(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Aug 12, 4:13 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro<(E-Mail Removed)_zealand>
>>> wrote:

>>
>>>> In message
>>>> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>>> Matty F wrote:

>>
>>>>> I loathe command languages so no we didn't have anything like TECO.

>>
>>>> No programmable text-manipulation tools? Shame.

>>
>>> The business users wrote simple letters etc. Programmers wrote source
>>> programs and made changes as necessary. Why would either of those want
>>> or need programmable text-manipulation tools?

>>
>> To automate repetitive tasks.
>>
>>>> But with no “command languages”, how did you issue your commands, then?

>>
>>> I think we are in different universes. What are examples of "commands"
>>> that might be issued? I'm talking about ordinary commercial systems
>>> and programming of the same. They used to be done in COBOL when I
>>> started programming, apart from some horrible FORTRAN and some quite
>>> good NCR program generators.

>>
>> Did you not have makefiles? Automated build systems?

>
> Certainly not. Why the heck would I want those? In the last system I
> worked on, an application could typically have thousands of separately
> compiled modules, although there was no real limit to the size of the
> application.
> A module could be compiled in a few seconds. No linking process was
> needed. There was an option to automatically go to a test process
> after the compile.
> Like I said, we are in different computing universes. I'm not trying
> to sell anything, but what we did worked extremely well for some 30
> years and is still working.


So why aren't you using it now instead of your Windows PC ?

--
"I'm completely operational, and all my circuits are functioning perfectly."
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-13-2010
In message
<(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F
wrote:

> On Aug 12, 9:41 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand>
> wrote:
>
>> Did you not have makefiles? Automated build systems?

>
> Certainly not. Why the heck would I want those? In the last system I
> worked on, an application could typically have thousands of separately
> compiled modules, although there was no real limit to the size of the
> application.
> A module could be compiled in a few seconds. No linking process was
> needed. There was an option to automatically go to a test process
> after the compile.
> Like I said, we are in different computing universes. I'm not trying
> to sell anything, but what we did worked extremely well for some 30
> years and is still working.


Sounds like you were operating in a very closed system, with very simple
build needs, like not needing to cross-compile for different architectures,
run under different OSes etc.

How did you manage version control?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Sweetpea
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-13-2010
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:41:20 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> Sounds like you were operating in a very closed system, with very simple
> build needs, like not needing to cross-compile for different
> architectures, run under different OSes etc.
>
> How did you manage version control?


If he was developing for that installation then he wouldn't need to cross-
compile or run under different Disc Operating Systems.

Version Control Systems are only really needed if multiple persons are
involved in writing a program and multiple releases are being done on a
regular basis.


--
"Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Matty F
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-13-2010
On Aug 13, 9:13 am, Enkidu <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 12/08/10 21:41, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:


> > Did you not have makefiles? Automated build systems?

>
> >

> Compile and link decks. In those days programs were smaller and the
> overhead of recompiling everything was not high. Makefiles sprung out of
> the need to compile everything and in particular the kernel (if an OS
> had one) which is a different category of problem to compiling a program.


"the need to compile everything"? Why not instead have an unlimited
number of separately compiled modules that call each other at runtime
with no linking needed?
If you compile a module, that's probably because the source has been
changed, in which case the editor knows everything it needs to know
(i.e. the module name) in order to call the compiler, without a
makefile being needed.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Matty F
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-13-2010
On Aug 13, 10:40 am, victor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 12/08/2010 11:11 p.m., Matty F wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 12, 9:41 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro<l...@geek-
> > central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> >> In message
> >> <(E-Mail Removed)>, Matty F
> >> wrote:

>
> >>> On Aug 12, 4:13 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro<(E-Mail Removed)_zealand>
> >>> wrote:

>
> >>>> In message
> >>>> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> >>>> Matty F wrote:

>
> >>>>> I loathe command languages so no we didn't have anything like TECO.

>
> >>>> No programmable text-manipulation tools? Shame.

>
> >>> The business users wrote simple letters etc. Programmers wrote source
> >>> programs and made changes as necessary. Why would either of those want
> >>> or need programmable text-manipulation tools?

>
> >> To automate repetitive tasks.

>
> >>>> But with no “command languages”, how did you issue your commands, then?

>
> >>> I think we are in different universes. What are examples of "commands"
> >>> that might be issued? I'm talking about ordinary commercial systems
> >>> and programming of the same. They used to be done in COBOL when I
> >>> started programming, apart from some horrible FORTRAN and some quite
> >>> good NCR program generators.

>
> >> Did you not have makefiles? Automated build systems?

>
> > Certainly not. Why the heck would I want those? In the last system I
> > worked on, an application could typically have thousands of separately
> > compiled modules, although there was no real limit to the size of the
> > application.
> > A module could be compiled in a few seconds. No linking process was
> > needed. There was an option to automatically go to a test process
> > after the compile.
> > Like I said, we are in different computing universes. I'm not trying
> > to sell anything, but what we did worked extremely well for some 30
> > years and is still working.

>
> So why aren't you using it now instead of your Windows PC ?


The operating system was purely for commercial businesses, to maintain
large text-only systems such as insurance, local body rating systems,
parts suppliers, quoting systems, DVD rentals, hotel reservation
systems etc. I'm retired and I don't need any of that.
The operating system cost over $4000 per copy and Windows is cheaper.

Since the operating system was written before Windows was thought of,
text files are incompatible with Word etc. People using Windows keep
sending me stuff, so I use Windows.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Sweetpea
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-13-2010
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 22:35:47 -0700, Matty F wrote:

> On Aug 13, 10:40 am, victor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> On 12/08/2010 11:11 p.m., Matty F wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Aug 12, 9:41 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro<l...@geek-
>> > central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
>> >> In message
>> >> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> >> Matty F wrote:

>>
>> >>> On Aug 12, 4:13 pm, Lawrence
>> >>> D'Oliveiro<(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:

>>
>> >>>> In message
>> >>>>

<(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> >>>> Matty F wrote:

>>
>> >>>>> I loathe command languages so no we didn't have anything like
>> >>>>> TECO.

>>
>> >>>> No programmable text-manipulation tools? Shame.

>>
>> >>> The business users wrote simple letters etc. Programmers wrote
>> >>> source programs and made changes as necessary. Why would either of
>> >>> those want or need programmable text-manipulation tools?

>>
>> >> To automate repetitive tasks.

>>
>> >>>> But with no “command languages”, how did you issue your commands,
>> >>>> then?

>>
>> >>> I think we are in different universes. What are examples of
>> >>> "commands" that might be issued? I'm talking about ordinary
>> >>> commercial systems and programming of the same. They used to be
>> >>> done in COBOL when I started programming, apart from some horrible
>> >>> FORTRAN and some quite good NCR program generators.

>>
>> >> Did you not have makefiles? Automated build systems?

>>
>> > Certainly not. Why the heck would I want those? In the last system I
>> > worked on, an application could typically have thousands of
>> > separately compiled modules, although there was no real limit to the
>> > size of the application.
>> > A module could be compiled in a few seconds. No linking process was
>> > needed. There was an option to automatically go to a test process
>> > after the compile.
>> > Like I said, we are in different computing universes. I'm not trying
>> > to sell anything, but what we did worked extremely well for some 30
>> > years and is still working.

>>
>> So why aren't you using it now instead of your Windows PC ?

>
> The operating system was purely for commercial businesses, to maintain
> large text-only systems such as insurance, local body rating systems,
> parts suppliers, quoting systems, DVD rentals, hotel reservation systems
> etc. I'm retired and I don't need any of that. The operating system cost
> over $4000 per copy and Windows is cheaper.
>
> Since the operating system was written before Windows was thought of,
> text files are incompatible with Word etc. People using Windows keep
> sending me stuff, so I use Windows.


What is the name of this OS?


--
"Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Its a bird, its a plane, its.. um, an Attribute based System? thunk Ruby 14 04-03-2010 10:08 AM
Its a bird, its a plane, its.. um, an Attribute based System? thunk Ruby 0 04-01-2010 10:25 PM
Its a bird, its a plane, no ummm, its a Ruide thunk Ruby 1 03-30-2010 11:10 AM
EIGRP and its limits Dennis Breithaupt Cisco 2 10-11-2005 08:09 PM
Urgent: restrict textfield events on reaching its maxlength Muralidhar Javascript 0 08-07-2003 02:22 PM



Advertisments