[net.micro.atari16] Standard OS for 68000-based PC's

montnaro%chenengo.tcpip@GE-CRD.ARPA (05/02/86)

Received: by chenengo.steinmetz (3.0/1.1x Steinmetz)
	id AA21539; Fri, 2 May 86 15:47:16 EDT
Date: Fri, 2 May 86 15:47:16 EDT
From: Skip Montanaro <montnaro%chenengo.tcpip@csbvax>
Posted-Date: Fri, 2 May 86 15:47:16 EDT
Message-Id: <8605021947.AA21539@chenengo.steinmetz>
To: nike!caip!cbmvax!daveh@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Cc: info-atari16@score.stanford.edu
Subject: Standard OS for 68000-based PC's


Dave,

Your idea of one supported OS for the various 68000 machines is not unique.
I think the main reason that various workstation vendors (Sun, Silicon
Graphics, Masscomp, etc.) went with Unix rather than develop their own
operating systems was that they bought into a big software base and saved
themselves countless amounts of money developing something that just
wouldn't cooperate with anything else. Why Apple, Atari, and Commodore
didn't see this light I am not sure. Since they now each have their own
(proprietary) operating system, it's unlikely that they will change.

What if you could pick and choose between three pieces of hardware, one
unifying operating system (some dialect of Unix jumps to mind), and three
(or more!) graphic shells?

Mac -----\		    /----- Mac Shell
	  \		   / 		   
Amiga ---------- Un*x ------------ Intuition Shell
	  /                \		     	 
Atari ST-/       	    \----- GEM Shell     

It sure would be nice! Perhaps we could all start off with a decent base of
software tools: compilers, SCCS, make, {n,t}roff, etc. Oh well, someday
maybe someone will market a PC with that kind of foresight...

==========
Skip Montanaro
ARPA: montanaro@ge-crd.arpa
US Mail: General Electric Company
	 Corporate Research and Development
	 P.O. Box 8
	 Bldg KW, Room C210
	 Schenectady, NY 12304
Phone: 518-387-7312
==========

daveh@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (Dave Haynie) (05/05/86)

In article <8605022009.AA03120@ucbvax.berkeley.edu> montnaro%chenengo.tcpip@GE-CRD.ARPA writes:
>Why Apple, Atari, and Commodore didn't see this light I am not sure. Since
>they now each have their own (proprietary) operating system, it's unlikely
>that they will change.
>
>What if you could pick and choose between three pieces of hardware, one
>unifying operating system (some dialect of Unix jumps to mind), and three
>(or more!) graphic shells?
>
>Mac -----\		    /----- Mac Shell
>	  \		   / 		   
>Amiga ---------- Un*x ------------ Intuition Shell
>	  /                \		     	 
>Atari ST-/       	    \----- GEM Shell     
>
>It sure would be nice! Perhaps we could all start off with a decent base of
>software tools: compilers, SCCS, make, {n,t}roff, etc. Oh well, someday
>maybe someone will market a PC with that kind of foresight...

I think the main reason is twofold -- firstoff, a machine like the MAC was
apparently conceived as more of a closed appliance computer, and as such 
didn't require a REAL operating system; it only has the MAC graphics
environment to work with.  As for there being no accepted standard 68000
operating system (which today seem a logical thing, especially considering
there are people using MACs for development who could really benefit from
a conventional CLI), that's mainly why none of the current big 3 used any
one system (MAC didn't have one, and the Amiga and ST were developed
concurrently.  Though why the ST couldn't stick to standard CP/M-68K I
don't know).  Anyway, UN*X would have been nice on all machines, and as
well my perference, but it wouldn't lend itself well to a basic 68000
based machine -- its too big to run completely from floppies, it like
demand paged virtual memory, etc.  Now if we had a minimal system with
10 Meg hard drive, 68010, and some MMU or other, then we'd be talking
UN*X (or we'd be fools if we weren't).  

As for these machines being locked into their current OSs, that's probably
true from the point of view of machine specific support; not that you 
couldn't write an OS-9 graphics shell that made Intuition calls, I just
don't think its likely to be commercially supported.  But like the 
workstation market, I think that the current manufacturers might decide
sooner or later to support a standard OS (if an acceptable one emerges),
just like Apollo has decided to also offer UN*X in addition to its
propriatary Ageis OS.
-- 

Dave Haynie    {caip,inhp4,allegra,seismo}!cbmvax!daveh
               "There, beyond the bounds of your weak imagination
                Lie the noble towers of my city, bright and gold"
								-Genesis