shmuel+...@patriot.net (Shmuel Metz  , Seymour J.) writes:
> We had an SE in the mid 1970's who claimed that IBM was ready to ship
> a TSS release with a virtual machine capability but pulled the plug on
> it at the last minute. He claimed that performance was good, and was
> not a happy camper when it was dropped. I don't know whether VM/XB was
> based on that work or was done from scratch.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012o.html#30 Regarding Time Sharing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012o.html#31 Regarding Time Sharing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012o.html#34 Regarding Time Sharing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012o.html#35 Regarding Time Sharing

an objective of VM/XB was to have microkernel that had common device
support & error recovery for the mainstream operating systems
(significant cost duplication having three different device support and
error recovery) ... the stripped down tss/370 kernel example for at&t
unix.

as mainstream hudson valley jumped on vm/xb bloating to 500 people
writing specs and nobody writting code ... there was contingent that
things might still be saved by adapting the stripped down tss/370
kernel. it sacrificies much of my original objective of having
microkernel that could run on high-end mainframe (aka LSRAD) as well as
low-end (non-370) microprocessors.

while tss/370 virtual machine mid-70s, could come close to vm/370 for
virtual guest operation ... it still couldn't match vm370/cms for
interactive computing (my work on virtual memory management and dynamic
adaptive resource management). however, decade later (mid-80s), vm370
had gotten quite bloated ... while tss/370 had changed little ... and
the stripped down kernel for AT&T unix platform had returned to much
closer to the original cp67 microkernel.

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to