Hard to detect sarcasm or parody here, but this is a great example of someone condemning the systems which were cheap (or license-free), widely available, worked well enough for most people, and provided huge benefits to millions, because it doesn't comply with his own narrow view of how it should be done.
> If you weren't a computer scientist (or college student) you weren't even getting a job working on one!
Exactly. A system whose priority is preventing people from ever using it.
> example of someone condemning the systems which were cheap (or license-free), widely available
Right!
> , worked well enough for most people
Well, with a mouse click, the Chinese can cause most of the self-balancing mobility devices (scooters, etc.) within a few miles of all military bases and schools to turn off while doing 10-20mph down the street (thus seriously injuring the rider). Goin' be tough to fight a war with ripped up ACL/MCLs and broken bones! 100% of the technology came from the fruit of Richard Stallman's religion.
Can't feel me? Okay, how about if you work for the federal government or have a credit file in the United States (or much of Europe) and all of your financial information is stolen so that the data can now be used to kill your family (either literally or financially) if you don't give them something they know you have and that want (or maybe even if you do!).
So I respectfully disagree with "well enough for most people" because impressionable tech kids didn't know any better ("everybody is doing it") and were convinced to give away their advanced technology over the Internet to people who can't or shouldn't handle it because they want to kill us (literally or financially), aren't trusted and/or don't have the proper education.
Fortunately the passage of time heals all wounds and much that free software movement was really just a bunch of knock-offs of truly new art that was created by companies that have been drifting "sideways" lately (since their founders left) and that's given the governments (barely) enough time to catch up. Soon, code will have to (by platform regulation and eventually federal law) be signed by a third-party before it can run on some unsuspecting user or business' computing platform. But also, there are the Amazing and Wonderful Services that are scooping up all of the millions of would-be idiot developers and subsidizing their lack of educations to ensure that they don't get into too much trouble (and to quickly identify and neutralize them if they are trouble). There's such a demand for this service that they're able to use the revenue to fund a fleet of friggin' spaceships and deep sea exploration platforms.
> his own narrow view of how it should be done
Right again! But note that narrow views coming from some people are far better than the consensus of many people. I know that breaks Star Trek or something, but it happens to be how American business works, for example.
How many of them had the manuals? Very few. The famous "Orange Wall of Manuals" was often secreted away, for the wizards to consult, but not for the masses to enlighten themselves with.
As near as I could ever find, the format of a VMS executable file did not appear in the DEC manuals. I meant that as a commentary on the "VMS had great docs" sentiment.
At one point, I was convinced that understanding the format of an executable file (a.out, COFF, XCOFF, Mach-O, ELF, .com, .exe, PE, etc) was important to understanding the operating system itself. I spent a fair amount of effort and some money buying books trying to find the VMS executable file format. Couldn't find a hint.
It did, sigh. It was in the LINK'ER documentation. RSX/VMS was all about object modules being shared between concurrently running applications in separate user spaces (because RAM was crazy expensive and DISK was crazy slow and expensive).
The format for runtime libraries, executables and memory-mapped sections in general descended from the PDP11 a bit and I believe it changed radically (for the first time in decades) with the introduction of the 64-bit Alpha architecture under "Open"VMS.
How did ELF format files play in VMS' idea of process-as-elaborate-address-sapce, where running a command involved reading or mapping in an executable, and then jumping to the entry point? Or did I64 VMS abandon the unusual VMS process model?
Thank you! I'm serious, I bought several books and inquired of VMS experts (on usenet, that long ago) looking for anything about VMS executable format. This is the first hint I've gotten.
I have a friend who converted a coat closet in his house into a datacenter large enough for a MicroVAX II with air-conditioning. He had run terminal lines to every room in the house to plug-in VTs. That said, he had a legit reason for doing it. Basically writing code 24x7 a day for his customers in those pre-laptop days.
> If you weren't a computer scientist (or college student) you weren't even getting a job working on one!
Exactly. A system whose priority is preventing people from ever using it.