> >Strike one for bloatware, I agree. I once set up a 50-user stock control
> >system running on a low-end 486 with 16Mb RAM with Novel NetWare 3.12...
>
> I know about that too. And indeed. Netware 3.12 would run on that, but not
> on much less.
Never underestimate Novel NetWare. I used to have several 10-user NetWare
3.12 setups running on IBM PS/2-80 servers. These were 386dx20 with 8Mb
RAM! These ran fine with quite hefty database applications - I only had to
up the RAM to 16Mb when I added TCP/IP support.
> Hehehe. Yes, these old boxes really had no protection at all to hackers
> and crackers. But in those days, before 1980, there was not much fear of
> things like that happening. (Resident hackers in training excepted of
> course ;)
It wasn't uncommon for the students to know more than the teachers...
> I think I know what you mean. I have used a Prime machine too. It was not
> that slow, it was actually the first Unix machine I got my hands on. That
> is what started my fascination with Unix.
Well, ours was of mid-70s vintage...
> >It was in it's own air-conditioned room, protected with the most evil
halon
> >fire-extinguisher system I'd ever seen. (If the ceiling tiles started to
> >fly, you had about 5 seconds to get out of the room before you
> >suffocated...)
>
> Yup. Been there, done that. Because some failure triggered the halon
> system to go off. Man, did I have a rotten time for some days!!
Nasty stuff, ain't it...
> >But, the mother of them all was the CICS mainframe. This was the size of
my
> >apartment, with valves (ObTeenager - glass vacuum tubes that functioned
as
> >transistors!) and was WATER-COOLED!!!! Believe it or not, we only
retired
> >it six years ago! This ran a basic MRP system, written in a horrible
> >mixture of COBOL and FORTRAN.
>
> Hahaha!! At the main office of my work they have something like that still
> in action!! Next to an IBM S/370. (Did you know there is a linux port for
> the S/370 out??? Yay!)
WooHoo! I wasn't aware of that...
> The CICS machine is programmed mainly in Fortran 66 (they lost the tape
> with Fortran 77) and assembler. We're working very hard to cross-compile
> the code from the CICS to the big IBM as much as possible, but it still
> takes a helluva lot of handwork. Most code is so old and crumpled that we
> decided it's better to redo the assembler programs in clean Cobol, and
> patch up the Fortran 66 code to Fortran 77 as we go.
Should make quite an improvement.
> >I remember being insanely jealous of the guys who could toggle in the
> >bootstrap code without touching the manual...
>
> I could only do the first 64 switch sequences ;-)
Still better than I could manage...
Regards,
Ozz.
