UNIX hits the Big Three-Oh 239
sparcv9 writes: "If you scope the timeline over at Éric Lévénez's site, you'll see that today, November 3rd, is the 30th birthday of the UNIX Time-Sharing System V1. The Open Group's UNIX history describes the features of Version 1 as having an "assembler for a PDP-11/20, file system, fork(), roff and ed. It was used for text processing of patent documents." We've come a long way in just three decades."
Happy BDay UNIX (Score:2)
Re:Happy BDay UNIX (Score:2)
Eerie coincidence. I have a friend who I am building a Linux box for. Her birthday is today too....
Re:Happy BDay UNIX (Score:2)
Re:Happy BDay UNIX (Score:2)
I've only known UNIX for ten of it's last ten years... I'm nearly thirty too, and we met each other at University. Haven't lost touch since, we're lifelong buddies.
Re:Happy BDay UNIX (Score:2)
wow older than I am (Score:1)
Re:wow older than I am (Score:4, Insightful)
The real question then might be: Who fell asleep and let Bill take over the world?
Re:wow older than I am (Score:1)
And as for UNIX not going far enough, have you used Mac OS X? This is UNIX on crack, smack and PCP. It is the best version of Unix on the market today with respect for your average computer user. It's far more user friendly than Linux and more advanced than Windows. Other versions of Unix offer anything OS X is missing.
So what isn't found in Unix between the commercial Unix version, Linux and Mac OS X that you think needs to be there?
Re:wow older than I am (Score:4, Flamebait)
Yes, and according to your link, "Microsoft Windows was announced November, 1983" but wasn't actually released until November 1985.
TWO YEARS of amazing Microsoft VaporWare(tm), and the marketing machine still rolls on, flattening all in its path. It's the one thing that UNIX has never figured out how to do... even in thirty years...
Re:wow older than I am (Score:2)
Re:wow older than I am (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:wow older than I am (Score:1)
AT&T
Enough cheap puns for now...
Re: (Score:2)
Gotta love the irony of it (Score:3, Funny)
Actually, no. (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't. Patents are one of the most useful and benificial tools of the technological age.
I DO dearly hate the missuse and total bastardization of the patent concept that we now see applied, for instance the application of the patent concept to pure IP, like operating systems.
KFG
Re:Actually, no. (Score:2)
-Paul Komarek
Re:Actually, no. (Score:3, Insightful)
-Paul Komarek
Re:Actually, no. (Score:2)
Clearly, encouragement of innovation was never _really_ the primary motive of the patent system, whatever the constitution says...
Re:Actually, no. (Score:2)
Great idea for encouraging innovation -- in the surrounding countries, who would reap the benefits of the brain drain this would inevitably cause. Do you even run your ideas through your head before suggesting them?
Re:Gotta love the irony of it (Score:1)
This patent processing machine came later, and might have been the first mature system, but it technically wasn't first, just a short interlude in the bigger picture.
That make you feel better? :-)
changed my mind (Score:2, Redundant)
Unix is obviously evil.
Re:changed my mind (Score:1)
Jesus, who pissed in your wheaties this morning?! Desperate attempt at humor/smartass remark != troll...
!= != := (Score:2)
Neither good nor evil (Score:1)
Besides, everyone already knows which OS is REALLY the evil one.
__
The question is not where do I want to go today, but where have all my credit card numbers, p0rn website passwords, and naked doggie sex pictures gone?
Re:Neither good nor evil (Score:2, Interesting)
Unix Programming Manuel (Score:2, Interesting)
Does anybody have the original programming manuel? It is indeed a classic piece of memorabilia to own especially if you're a Unix fan.
Re:Unix Programming Manuel (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe for its 30th birthday present, someone could buy Unix some vowels.
Manuel? (Score:1)
Wow, I didn't know they used cheap mexican labour to program software back then...
(No offense to mexicans. If you're offended, you obviously don't get it.)
Re:Unix Programming Manuel (Score:2, Informative)
[bell-labs.com]
Unix Programmer's Manual November 3, 1971.
Oh Me Oh My (Score:1)
Lucky for us it wasn't PDF... ;-)
Re:Oh Me Oh My (Score:2, Informative)
Blast from the Past (Score:3, Interesting)
Wow, that was fun.
The earliest UNIX systems is circa 1969-70 (Score:1)
Re:The earliest UNIX systems is circa 1969-70 (Score:5, Interesting)
Here are the first few paragraphs from The Bell System Technical Journal article entitled "The UNIX Time-sharing System", by D.M. Ritchie and K. Thompson (manuscript received April 3, 1978)
UNIX has certainly come a long way from these meager beginings.
UNIX is a general-purpose, multi-user, interactive operating system for the larger Digital Equipment Corporation PDP-11 and the Interdata 8/32 computers, including
(i) A heirarchical file system incorporating demountable volumes,
(ii) Compatible file, device, and inter-process I/O,
(iii) The ability to initiate asynchronous processes,
(iv) System command language selectable on a per-user basis,
(v) Over 100 subsystems including a dozen languages,
(vi) High degree of portability.
This paper discusses the nature and implication of the file system and of the user command interface.
I. Introduction
There have been four versions of the UNIX time-sharing system. The earliset (circa 1969-70) ran on the Digital Corporation PDP-7 and -9 computers. The second version ran on the unprotected PDP-11/20 computer. The third incoporated mutliprogramming and ran on the PDP-11/34, /40, /45, /60, and /70 computers; it is the one described in the previously published version of this paper, and is also the most widely used today. This paper describes only the fourth, current system that runs on the PDP-11/70 and the Interdata 8/32 computers. In fact, the differences among the various systems is rather small; most of the revisions made to the originally published version of this paper, aside from those concerned with style, had to do with details of the implementation of the file system.
Since PDP-11 UNIX became operational in February, 1971, over 600 installations have been put into service. Most of them are engaged in applications such as computers scince education, the preperation and formatting of documents and other textual material, the collection and processing of trouble data from various switching machines within the Bell System, and recording and checking telephone service orders. our own installation is used mainly for other topics in computer science, and also for documentation perparation.
No!!! (Score:4, Funny)
I have to hurry...
rm -rf
OK I'm saved now...
But what OS should I use now? MacOS X is Unix... BeOS is kind of Unix... What else's left? Windows XP... No, it can't be... There has to be something else... Oh God, don't do this to me!!!
Re:No!!! (Score:1)
OT (Score:2)
Apocalypse Now, right? Recently saw it... wierd, wierd, disturbed movie. Really awesome characters/actors though, and Colonel Kilgore ranks at the top.
Re:No!!! (Score:1)
Am I the only person who thinks this is kinda scarey?
In the machine room, OpenVMS is 'technically' alive, but I don't hear stories of massive new OpenVMS installations, and the VAX line is on its last legs. You've still got a few mainframe operating systems still around (MVS, etc...), but IBM seems to be moving in the direction of partitioned linux installations.
On the desktop IBM's managerial stupidity killed OS/2, Apple has made MacOS into just a BSD shell...for whatever reason, BeOS is dead for whatever reason (but it was pretty UNIXy anyway).
Whatever happened to all the diversity? I don't think you could blame that _all_ on Microsoft - they're the sole surviving company hawking a non-UNIX operating system.
WTF's up with that?
Re:No!!! (Score:2)
When you look at something like NetBSD, which runs on something like two dozen different architectures, that's the definition of homogeneity. Unix is definitely the originator of 'open systems' which is precisely what killed the diverse lineup of mainframes in the 80's and 90's.
You can also look at this from the hardware side, which has also gotten homogeneous.
Of course, homogeneity isn't all bad. Standardization significantly improves competition, thus improving quality and lowering price.
OS/2 is not dead! (Score:2)
If I have understood things correctly, OS/2 was what OSX tries to be - an efficent and userfriendly operating system with a solid text-based washboard underbelly. BeOS too, for that matter.
How far have we come (Score:3, Insightful)
And lastly, where is it going?
Re:How far have we come (Score:4, Funny)
Where would you like to go today?
KFG
Re:How far have we come (Score:2)
Let me see-- Mac OS X is a good description of how far we have come. Sure Linux and FreeBSD are good expressions too but one is not reminded of it as quickly as one is with Mac OS X...
what HAVE we done? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:what HAVE we done? (Score:2, Insightful)
Its a good thing AND a bad thing. (Score:4, Interesting)
Its postive:
* Unix is easily the most reliable popular desktop, or server Operating System. Uptimes can and have been measured in years
* Modern Unix (of which Linux is the standard, but keep that low for now) is open, uses documented APIs, and provides users with great choice and flexibility as to how their machines work
* I've got high standard, and the ability to reconfigure a machine for say to day maintenace tasks without rebooting is in my opinion a standard part of any real server OS.
* Despite what most Slashdotters think, a modern Unix machine is capable of being used and administered entirely through its GUI or via the scripting-happy command line.
* Root sucks or rather, relying on one particular account to be the sole administrator sucks, and this si what most Unixes do. That stems from another problem
* RWX permissions suck. There's good replacements that work well and are just as easy to administer, but Linux, most BSDs, and many proprietary Unixes still use dodgy permissions which weren't desgned for security. Not being able to have any kind of fine grained control over who has access to a file sucks.
* lack of standardization hurts the platform. GNOME versus KDE hurts by dividing effort more than it helps by providing competition
Re:what HAVE we done? (Score:1)
Good thing the Egyptians didn't stand around worrying whether or not the pyramids could be built until some unforseen technological change came along
Necessity is the mother of invention
No matter where you go, there you are
So in answer to your two questions I would say, "yes" and "yes"!
LEXX
Re:what HAVE we done? (Score:2)
Well, the internal combustion engine hasn't really changed a lot since it was first developed either. Sometimes, systems built of small, simple, reliable components really can go the distance.
OTOH, future computers (say, 20 years from now) will likely have to deal with quantum processing hardware (no, this is not Star Trek). Since there will be a fundamental shift in the way we design algorithms for chips that work with Qbits, we may need a fundamental shift in the operating system too.
well, how about that (Score:5, Funny)
more than half the life of commercial computing (Score:5, Interesting)
Happy Birthday! (Score:5, Interesting)
You can't do that with in WIMP environments, God bless 'em (how do you script a mouse movement?). You can't do that without a lot of people all sharing their work. You can't do that, in other words, without Unix. I was this close to dashing off a fan letter to Thompson and Ritchie before I stopped myself (I'm sure they've heard it before). Yes, I know Unix is a lot more than T&R, but it was either that or spam everyone who'd ever written a utility.
Anyhow...just a note, if they're maybe reading this, to say thanks very much. Like I read somewhere else and promptly ripped off:
Unix soit qui mal y pense.
Re:Happy Birthday! (Score:2, Informative)
"set the position of the mouse to (0, 30)"
Assuming you've got the appropriate AppleScript extension, of course. Mac OS X is cool.
Re:Happy Birthday! (Score:1)
Re:Happy Birthday! (Score:1)
-Ben
Re:Happy Birthday! (Score:2, Funny)
OT: Ducts (Score:1)
Re:Happy Birthday! (Score:2)
Re:Happy Birthday! (Score:2)
In this context, it's not as bad - it's only saying that people who think badly of unix should be unix (now if you replaced that with should be converted to unix or something like that it might work) - but you should be careful about using quotes if you don't understand them completely.
Re:Happy Birthday! (Score:2)
I'm a Unix admin, naturally.
wimp enviornments (Score:4, Funny)
The mouse has pretty good functinoality. For everything else, there's Perl.
Good point. (Score:5, Insightful)
However, CLI's are the best way to hand complex instructions to a computer. The information density is great for the computer (you can send a lot of information to the computer very concisely) but not so great for the human. So if I want to view a simple report of activity in my log files, WIMPs are wonderful, but if I want to do more complex data-mining, I will have to add some command line functionality (a CLI of sorts...).
Horses for courses. And Happy BDay UNIX!
Re:Huh, computers bad with poor information densit (Score:2)
OK. Now you have complex network tasks to do which have millions of variations. Is the WIMP still superior? I don't think so.
I think that when VCI (Voice Command Interface) becomes perfected and widespread, it will give the best of both worlds.
Voice Command Interface (Score:2)
"Computer, recursively delete everything starting with a dot."
Possible interpretations:
Re:Happy Birthday! (Score:2)
As far as WIMP interfaces versus command lines, I think there is an easy explanation for why power users prefer command lines. Think of WIMP interfaces as akin to heiroglyphics or other picture-writing, and command lines as an approximation to natural language.
There's a reason nobody uses picture-writing today, including lack of flexibility and power and inefficiency. I'm not sure that we'll ever want a real "natural language interface", because I don't think the natural language facilities in humans are really up to casually conversing precise ideas. In the end, you might as well have a specialized command language. Of course, "smart" computers could make assumptions about what we mean to say, but we hate it when humans do that.
-Paul Komarek
That's not Unix specific (Score:3, Informative)
You can't do that with in WIMP environments, God bless 'em
Why not? Most GUI environments have had scripting capabilities to do this for a while, Windows has been able to do this task for around for years, and I'm sure Apple scripting language (not sure of its name - Applescript sounds obvious) can do it too.
What's Unix specific about it? Scripting rocks, but its hardly unique.
Pish-posh... operating system whippersnapper (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Pish-posh... operating system whippersnapper (Score:2)
Re:Pish-posh... operating system whippersnapper (Score:1)
Re:Pish-posh... operating system whippersnapper (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Pish-posh... operating system whippersnapper (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Pish-posh... operating system whippersnapper (Score:1)
forking (Score:5, Funny)
GCC error: The Oracle says, there is no fork
.
Re:forking (Score:1)
One way was easier.... (Score:2, Interesting)
(yeah, you could argue about the meaning of 'powerful', but you know what I mean)
Marijn
Re:One way was easier.... (Score:2)
Re:One way was easier.... (Score:1)
I think you'd find it lacking. Maybe you'd end up a Unix hater [catalog.com], though.
noah
Re:One way was easier.... (Score:2)
Multics (Score:1)
UNIX is much smaller and simpler.
Re:Multics (Score:1)
I guess a way to look at it is UNIX is still going strong while Honeywell, which made multics, now does other stuff.
Re:One way was easier.... (Score:4, Interesting)
The obvious answer is Multics. Unix was a pun on Multics since it was originally a single-user OS in its earliest days. The original authors needed something less ambitious that could fit into the small computer they had to play with. Although the scale of unix systems eventually greatly exceeded any known Multics system, there is still some inherent architectural "heft" in Multics that Unix never had (never needed?). It's almost pure theology now, but you did ask. More info at Multicians.org [multicians.org] I believe.
Re:One way was easier.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well the obvious question to your question is "for what?". Mainframes have been doing something like vmware for ages, had hugely advanced (and yes, crufty) networking protocols, record-oriented files, and I/O so well tuned it would make a strong webmaster cry. About the same time Unix was announced to the world, another OS built on capabilities security came out, but languished. VMS is built around async I/O from the ground up. NT inherits that I/O from VMS, and just about every kernel object can be inspected and given ACL's.
Mainframes also had a huge cost and came with the IBM monkey on your back, VMS only ran on DEC boxen, NT got features slapped on it that degraded its stability, and Unix was nearly free to start (AT&T was under a consent decree and basically couldn't be in the software business), completely free soon after, and portable to the campus toaster ovens. Unix had an evolutionary advantage similar to the ones humans enjoy: it could live anywhere.
Please tell me... (Score:1)
There goes my installation (Score:4, Funny)
Re:There goes my installation (Score:2, Funny)
But in a year... well... then we'll talk.
Huh, where did it go? (Score:1)
"At the current rate of development of the windows/dos environment Microsoft will eventually invent unix."
So, what, another 15 more years or so?
Will it be called the GallBatesmer *nix distro?
What the heck? (Score:1)
Those patent guys used to use that system?
Bring some of those guys back...people reviewing patents these days need some training!
Sheesh!
yay! (Score:2, Interesting)
Cray UNICOS on the timeline... (Score:2)
UNICOS/mk on the timeline... (Score:1)
big three ooooh! (Score:1)
Two Words (Score:1)
The writing is on the wall... (Score:4, Funny)
UNIX must be next. Slashdot said so.
Unless Slashdot's dying too. Then I may have to leave the basement. And that would suck.
Re:The writing is on the wall... (Score:2)
It would suck for all of us.
;)
winkie added ofr the humor impaired
Damn it. (Score:2)
-
The most overlooked advantage to owning a computer is that if they foul up there's no law against wacking them around a little. - Joe Martin, Porterfield
How to draw timelines and other graphs (Score:4, Informative)
graphviz [att.com]
Just a few more years! (Score:2, Funny)
I'm older than unix? (Score:2)
any comments about me being old, and I'll tell you to fork(roff).
You know you've been doing this too long when your manager says "to keep him in the loop" and you ask "for or do while?".
(sigh)
Re:BURP (Score:1)
Re:You know what the funny thing is? (Score:2)
Re:don't forget to check your Unix systems... (Score:2)