9 May
2024
9 May
'24
11:58 a.m.
I meant UCSD not native Pascal. I assume the SAGE was popular with those
who bought them, but relative to the PC, quite obscure of a computer. Most
people today have little knowledge of the SAGE II / IV. How many even
exist today? A hundred? I think the issue with Pascal at that time is
that the underlying DOS was adapted to the machine, but little time was
spent on the file utilities and such to make it a competitor with MS DOS or
CP/M for that matter. I can be convinced otherwise but it seems like
microcomputing Pascal was more of a staging environment for then upload
into a production mainframe/mini
Bill
On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 7:51 AM Raymond Wiker via cctalk <
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
The Sage machines had UCSD as one of their OS options
(others were Mirage
and probably also CP/M-68K). I've never heard of a native Pascal for Sage.
Sage had a multi-user BIOS, so you could have several people sharing a
single machine. They were also quite popular and successful for a while.
On 9 May 2024, at 13:39, Bill Degnan via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
wrote:
Without doing the research before asking, there was the UCSD p-System
Pascal for IBM PC which came out very early in the history of the IBM PC.
It was not very popular. The SAGE II that had native Pascal (68000) was
not a popular machine. Waterloo Pascal on the SuperPet....Pascal never
really made it on the microcomputer platform did it?
Bill
On Thu, May 9, 2024, 2:07 AM david barto via cctalk <
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
wrote:
> At Ken Bowles retirement from UCSD (Ken was the lead of the UCSD Pascal
> Project) he related a story that IBM came to UCSD after being
‘rejected’ by
> DR to see if the Regents of the University
would license UCSD Pascal
(the
> OS and the language) to IBM for release on
the new hardware IBM was
> developing. The UC Regents said ’no’.
>
> He was quite sad that history took the very different course.
>
> David
>
>> On May 3, 2024, at 6:30 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk <
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> PL/M (think "PL/1") was a high level programming language for
> microprocessors.
>>
>> CP/M was also briefly called "Control Program and Monitor"
>> It was written by Gary Kildall. (May 19, 1942 - july 11, 1994)
>>
>> Gary taught at Navy Postgraduate School in Monterey.
>> He took a break in 1972, to complete his PhD at University of
Washington.
>>
>> He wrote 8008 and 8080 instruction set simulators for Intel, and they
> loaned him hardware.
>>
>> In 1973? he wrote CP/M.
>> He offered it to Intel, but they didn't want it, although they marketed
> the PL/M.
>>
>> He and his wife started "Intergalactic Digital Research" in Pacific
> Grove. Later renamed "Digital Research, Inc."
>>
>> CP/M rapidly became a defacto standard as operating system for 8080 and
> later Z80 computers.
>>
>> In the late 1970s, when CP/M computers were available with 5.25"
drives,
> and there were hundreds, soon thousands of
different formats, I chatted
> with Gary, and pleaded with him ot create a "standard" format for
5.25".
>> His response was a very polite, "The standard format for CP/M is 8 inch
> single sided single density."
>> I pointed out that formats were proliferating excessively.
>> His response was a very polite, "I understand. Sorry, but the standard
> format for CP/M is 8 inch single sided single density."
>>
>>
>> In 1980? IBM was developing a personal computer. (y'all have heard of
> it) One of the IBM people had a Microsoft Softcard (Z80 plus CP/M) in
his
> Apple. IBM went to Microsoft, to negotiate
BASIC for the new machine,
and
> CP/M.
>>
>> Bill Gates explained and sent them to Digital Research.
>>
>> When the IBM representatives arrived, Gary was flying his plane up to
> Oakland to visit Bill Godbout. He hadn't seen a need to be present, and
> assumed that Dorothy would take care of the [presumably completely
routine]
> paperwork. While visiting Bill godbout, and
delivering some software was
> important, it WAS something that a low level courier could have done.
>>
>>
>> There was a little bit of a culture clash.
>> The IBM people were all in identical blue suits.
>> The DR people were in sandals, barefoot, shorts, t-shirts, braless
> women, with bicycles, surfboard, plants and even cats in the office,
>>
>> The IBM people demanded a signed non=disclosure ageement before
talking.
> Dorothy Kildall refused.
>>
>> When Dorothy got Gary on the phone, it is unreliably reported that he
> said, "well, let them sit on the couch and wait their turn like the
rest of
> the customers."
>>
>> It is also been said that DR people upstairs saw the IBM people
marching
> up, and thought that it was a drug raid. I
have stood in that bay
window
> overlooking the front door, and can believe
that.
>>
>> IBM chose to not do business with DR and went back to Microsoft.
>> When billg was unable to convince them that Microsoft was not in the
> operating system business, Microsoft went into the operating system
> business. They bought an unlimited license to QDOS (Tim Paterson's
work at
> Seattle Computer Products). They also hired
Tim Paterson.
>>
>> DR was working on CP/M-86, but it was a ways off.
>> Paterson had written QDOS ("Quick and Dirty Operating System") as a
> placeholder to be able to continue development while waiting for CP/M-86
>> We've mentioned before, that Tim Paterson got the idea for the
directory
> structure from Microsoft Standalone BASIC.
As Chuck pointed out, that
was
> not a new invention, merely a choice of which
way to do it.
>>
>> billg knew how to deal with officious managers. It is unreliably said
> that he told the Microsoft people, "Everybody who does not own a suit,
stay
> home tomorrow!"
>>
>> IBM insisted that Micorsoft beef up security. window shades, locks on
> doors that normally weren't, locks on file cabinets, etc.
>> It is unreliably said that to throw off anyboy who heard about it, that
> Microsoft referred to the IBm project as "Project Commodore"
>>
>>
>>
>> dr continued to sell CP/M.
>> When the 5150/:PC was ready, IBM announced it with PC-DOS, which was a
> renaming of MS-DOS,renaming 86-DOS, renaming QDOS.
>>
>> If I recall correctly theprice was $40 (or maybe $60?)
>>
>>
>> DR pointed out that NS-DOS was extremely similar to CP/M.
>>
>
https://www.cs.drexel.edu/~johnsojr/2012-13/fall/cs370/resources/An%20Insid…
>> IBM didn't consider it a problem,
andsimply offered to ALSO sell
> CP/M-86, particularly since they were already also marketing UCSD
P-System.
>>
>> CP/M-86 was not available yet, so everybody buying a disk based PC
> bought PC-DOS.
>> But, most of us assumed thata CP/M-86 would become the standard once it
> came out, and PC-DOS was similar and let us use the machines while
waiting.
>>
>> CP/M-86 took a long time to come out (6 months is a LONG time in such
> things).
>> When it did, the price was $240.
>> There are disagreemnets about whether DR or IBM had set the price
point.
>>
>> Most decided to keep using Pc-DOs until CP/M-86 had caught on.
>> But with the price differential, and the lead, PC-DOS remained the
> standard.
>>
>>
>> dr continued, came out with MP/M-86, and eventually came out with
> "Concurrent DOS", and "DR-DOS", which was based on MS-DOS.
>> Microsoft could not fault somebody for copying them, when it was the
> ones that they had copied.
>> No, Microsoft could certainly not claim trademark status for "DOS"!
>> In fact, although Microsoft trademarkd "MS-DOS", IBM did NOT
trademark
> PC-DOS, saying that it just meant Personal Compter Disk Operating
System,
> which is a description, not a unique name.
In 1987, I visited the
Patent
> and Trademark Office outside of Washington,
DC, and personally confirmed
> that in their stacks.
>>
>> Many people have said that blowing off IBM was the stupidest move in
the
> history of stupid moves.
>> Other people insist that blowing off IBM was the BRAVEST move in
history.
>>
>>
>> A lot of people gave Gary flack about it.
>> eventually, he bagan drinking.
>>
>> On July 8, 1994, Gary fell and hit his head. It is unclear whether that
> was during an altercation. (A lot of people fall during bar brawls) It
> was at the Franklin Street biker Bar & Grill, Investigation as a
potential
> homicide was inconclusive.
>>
>>
>> About 10 years ago, I was in Pacific Grove, and visited the DR house on
> Lighthouse street. An extremely hospitable fellow had recently bought
it
> in a foreclosure sale. At the time that he
bought it, he was unaware of
> the historical significance. He let me wander through the whole place,
> looking out the upstairs window at the walkway, etc.
>>
>> --
>> Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
>
>