Re: Now what will he do? (Too perfect!)

On Aug 13, 7:08 am, Alan Baker <alangba...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Will Edwin finally admit he's been wrong?

In spite of the fact that it is you who are wrong, not I?

I just found this, which sums it all up very nicely:

You conveniently left off the URL: http://lynnesblog.telemuse.net/141

A look at the blogger's picture reveals you've turned to a teenage
girl for your 'salvation,' Alan.

"Sure We're Open Source - Not
More of that BSD open source in the 1980's confusion from cnet
[386BSD & Unix]

So this teenager is going to educate CNet?

Alas, apparently that silly press release last week has totally confused
the writing fraternity into thinking the 1990's were actually the 1980's
(see Fun Friday - Homer's Illiad to be "Improved" for Silicon Valley).
Aside from the fact that Clinton and Reagan were both absolutely adored
by the American people, I don't think the 1980's were really enough like
the 1990's to easily confuse the two decades, do you?

She starts out with a heavy dose of B.S.

In this piece in cnet, "Unix got its start at AT&T, but Sun co-founder
Bill Joy was instrumental in an open-source variant developed at the
University of California at Berkeley. For half the company's history,
Sun used this BSD version of Unix in a product called SunOS".

Absolutely true.

"Bill Joy was the person largely responsible for the authorship of
Berkeley UNIX, also known as BSD, from which spring many modern forms
of UNIX, including FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD. Some of his most
notable contributions were TCP/IP, the vi editor, NFS, and the csh
shell."

http://www.computerhistory.org/events/index.php?spkid=1&ssid=1120598654

"Fairly quickly he moved the story to where it picked up at the
University of Berkeley and then things really got interesting. He
spoke a lot about Bill Joy's involvement as a grad student and
programming most of the code in BSD. Bill Joy was the first system
administrator as well as kernel hacker and computer programming major.
"

http://ezine.daemonnews.org/200503/editorial.html

"I created the BSD Unix distributions 20 years ago, and distributed
the source for these widely. The most notable technical contribution
of BSD was a high-performance and well-debugged implementation of TCP/
IP on the internet, because code was available in source form. Sun
started shortly thereafter, and pioneered the notion of "open system",
with public interfaces but proprietary implementations, a big advance
over the proprietary systems of the time." -- Bill Joy

http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee380/Abstracts/991117.html

I wonder what they've been drinking today?

This is a remark from a 'professional' writer?

Back in the 1980's, BSD required an AT&T source license to obtain source
code - a considerable expense for a company. SunOS required an AT&T
license as well. At Symmetric Computer Systems, to sell our BSD-based
Symmetrix 375 computer required an AT&T license and we only used BSD -
not System V! Afraid it was true for everyone. But that's not all.

"BSD, or Berkeley Software Distribution, began in 1977 from the
efforts of the Computer Systems Research Group (CSRG) of the
University of California at Berkeley. It began as a supplement to
Sixth Edition Unix, which was developed by Bell Telephone
Laboratories."

"When Thompson returned to BTL, a graduate student named Bill Joy
began to continue development on the Sixth Edition system. In late
1977, he began to prepare a tape consisting of a Unix pascal compiler
and a text editor named ex. This tape, in standard tp format and
costing $50, was called the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD)."

http://www.tribug.org/bsd.html

"But theory turned out not to be Joy's forte. He started hacking code
and never stopped. "His goal was to build something that worked,"
recalls Gage. And so he did. During his seven years at Berkeley, Joy
and a few other graduate students and staff researchers spearheaded an
intensive software development effort that culminated, most famously,
in a radically improved version of AT&T's Unix, known simply as
Berkeley Unix or, more commonly, as BSD,* for Berkeley Software
Distribution."

"Talk about your killer apps! Berkeley Unix worked so well that DARPA*
chose it to be the preferred "universal computing environment" linking
together Arpanet* research nodes, thus setting in place an essential
piece of infrastructure for the later growth of the Internet. An
entire generation of computer scientists cut their teeth on Berkeley
Unix. Without it, the Net might well have evolved into a shape similar
to what it is today, but with it, the Net exploded."

"How did the small group of Berkeley programmers pull off such a feat?
Well, for one thing, there was Joy, a programmer around whom legends
accrue like so many iron filings stuck to a magnet. He could read at
age 3, play chess at 4 and, during his oral exams, invented a "sorting
algorithm"* on the fly that so stunned his examiners, one of them
later compared the experience to "Jesus confounding his elders.""

http://archive.salon.com/tech/fsp/2000/05/16/chapter_2_part_one/index.html

"Other systems have historically been derived from BSD or included BSD
features, including several of the later Bell Laboratories Research
UNIX editions themselves. In 1982, Bill Joy, one of BSD's earliest
system architects, formed Sun Microsystems with three other
individuals. He took 4.1BSD along with him, and Sun/OS was developed
to support Sun's line of microcomputers. Carnegie Mellon based their
MACH system upon 4.2BSD (an act later reciprocated when Berkeley based
some of 4.3BSD-Reno upon MACH 2.5). MACH 2.5 also formed the basis for
NeXT Step and Digital's OSF/1 and DEC UNIX, and elements of MACH exist
in the current BSD incarnations (although FreeBSD has kept MACH's
virtual memory system, NetBSD and OpenBSD have replaced it with
Charles D. Cranor's UVM implementation)."


http://www.tribug.org/bsd.html

BSD just wasn't open source then. You paid to play - big time. Our first
investment from venture in 1983 came in the door in $$$ and went out the
door in license and prepaid royalties to AT&T, just like at Sun - want
to see the check stubs? They were part of an exhibit several years ago
on the story of a BSD workstation startup circa 1984. (One young man who
I chatted with at the time said "It wasn't a golden age, but.... well,
it was a golden age, wasn't it").

"Bill received a B.S.E.E. in Electrical Engineering and Computer
Science from the University of Michigan in 1975, after which he
attended graduate school at U.C. Berkeley where he was the principal
designer of Berkeley UNIX (BSD) and received a M.S. in Electrical
Engineering and Computer Science. The Berkeley version of UNIX became
the standard in education and research, garnering development support
from DARPA, and was notable for introducing virtual memory and
internetworking using TCP/IP to UNIX. BSD was widely distributed in
source form so the others could learn from it and improve it; this
style of software distribution has now led to the "open source"
movement, of which BSD is now recognized to be one of the earliest
examples."

http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee380/Abstracts/991117.html


It took years and a careful process by Berkeley to document and remove
proprietary source from BSD, as it was very intertwined. Even with best
efforts, they had a lawsuit from AT&T / USL that was only settled in
1994. And it took years of uncompensated effort (not backed by Sun -
actually, Compaq was the one who donated machines) to create an open
source X86 version - thoroughly documented in one of the premiere (code
and all) hard tech magazines of the time.

"As people may recall from the original settlement of the BSD lawsuit,
three files had to be removed from BSD that represented things in SysV
source. What is often forgotten, though, is that AT&T itself was in a
far greater bind because while there was some SysV code in BSD, there
was a LOT of "borrowed" and misattributed BSD code found to be in AT&T
SysV. BSD permits this, but the license at the time required the
advertising clause, and AT&T fraudulently ignored this. The actual
settlement said that AT&T would no longer sue the BSD people, and that
the University of California would also agree to hold AT&T harmless
for misappropriating BSD code. Hence, much of the code that SCO owns
is actually misattributed BSD code for which UC permitted AT&T (and
it's decendents) to use."

http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/05/23.html

And it wasn't until 1992 that a completely open source BSD became
available to the public. It's called 386BSD, and it's well documented in
Dr. Dobbs Journal from 1991 onwards.

Oh, by the way, Solaris isn't BSD, just like Mach (from Apple) isn't
BSD. Solaris is almost an "un-BSD" in many ways architecturally - a
classic Fred Brooks "second system syndrome" in action. So invoking BSD
when they were so eager to dump it seems a bit ahistorical, doesn't it?

"SunOS is a version of the Unix operating system developed by Sun
Microsystems for their workstation and server computer systems. The
SunOS name is usually only used to refer to versions 1.0 to 4.1.4 of
SunOS. These versions were based on BSD Unix, while SunOS version 5.0
and later are based on UNIX System V Release 4, and are marketed under
the brand name Solaris."

"In the late 1980s, AT&T and Sun announced that they were
collaborating on a project to merge the most popular Unix flavors on
the market at that time: BSD (including many of the features then
unique to SunOS), System V, and Xenix. This would become UNIX System V
Release 4 (SVR4)."

"On September 4, 1991, Sun announced that its next major OS release
would switch from its BSD-derived source base to one based on SVR4.
Although the internal designation of this release would be SunOS 5,
from this point Sun began using the marketing name Solaris. The
justification for this new "overbrand" was that it encompassed not
only SunOS, but also the OpenWindows desktop environment and Open
Network Computing (ONC) functionality."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SunOS

"The BSD release of Unix only held its dominant commercial position
for a few years before returning to its roots. As networking and other
4.2BSD improvements were integrated into the system V release, the
vendors usually switched back to it. However, later BSD developments
continued to be incorporated into System V."

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2000/03/17/bsd.html?page=2

As BSD was merged into SRV4, and Solaris is based on SRV4, Solaris,
like SunOS, is still based on BSD.

So let open source Solaris stand up for itself - it doesn't have to hide
behind BSD's history to shine on it's own. And it really does have to
stand on its own to beat Linux at their own game.

The history of Solaris can not be separated from the history of BSD.

Sun *bought* their OS, just as I first said. Did everyone catch that:

You are WRONG:

"Other systems have historically been derived from BSD or included BSD
features, including several of the later Bell Laboratories Research
UNIX editions themselves. In 1982, Bill Joy, one of BSD's earliest
system architects, formed Sun Microsystems with three other
individuals. He took 4.1BSD along with him, and Sun/OS was developed
to support Sun's line of microcomputers. Carnegie Mellon based their
MACH system upon 4.2BSD (an act later reciprocated when Berkeley based
some of 4.3BSD-Reno upon MACH 2.5). MACH 2.5 also formed the basis for
NeXT Step and Digital's OSF/1 and DEC UNIX, and elements of MACH exist
in the current BSD incarnations (although FreeBSD has kept MACH's
virtual memory system, NetBSD and OpenBSD have replaced it with
Charles D. Cranor's UVM implementation)."

http://www.tribug.org/bsd.html

Did everyone catch that:

"He took 4.1BSD along with him, and Sun/OS was developed to support
Sun's line of microcomputers."

Bill Joy took his work with him, and used it to make SunOS. He
didn't buy it from somebody else.

"In the late spring of 1982, Joy announced he was joining Sun
Microsystems. Over the summer, he split his time between Sun and
Berkeley, spending most of his time polishing his revisions to the
interprocess communication facilities and reorganizing the Unix kernel
sources to isolate machine dependencies. With Joy's departure, Leffler
took over responsibility for completing the project. Certain deadlines
had already been established and the release had been promised to the
DARPA community for the spring of 1983. Given the time constraints,
the work remaining to complete the release was evaluated and
priorities were set. In particular, the virtual memory enhancements
and the most sophisticated parts of the interprocess communication
design were relegated to low priority (and later shelved completely).
Also, with the implementation more than a year old and the Unix
community's expectations heightened, it was decided an intermediate
release should be put together to hold people until the final system
could be completed. This system, called 4.1c, was distributed in April
1983; many vendors used this release to prepare for ports of 4.2 to
their hardware. Pauline Schwartz was hired to take over the
distribution duties starting with the 4.1c release."

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2000/03/17/bsd.html?page=2

After years of being wrong about Sun buying their OS, after years of
me showing Alan Baker quotes like the ones I've filled this post
with, HE'S STILL GOT IT WRONG!

"BSD just wasn't open source then. You paid to play - big time. Our
first investment from venture in 1983 came in the door in $$$ and went
out the door in license and prepaid royalties to AT&T, just like at Sun
- want to see the check stubs?"

"The Berkeley copyright poses no restrictions on private or commercial
use of the software and imposes only simple and uniform requirements
for maintaining copyright notices in redistributed versions and
crediting the originator of the material only in advertising."

http://www.openbsd.org/policy.html

"Berkeley Unix: A version of AT&T Unix written by Berkeley students
and researchers, primarily Bill Joy. Considered by many to be the
first successful open source software development project. Also
referred to as BSD, or Berkeley Software Distribution. The ancestor of
386BSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and BSD/OS."

http://www.salon.com/tech/fsp/glossary/index.html

The licenses have few restrictions compared to other free software
licenses such as the GNU GPL or even the default restrictions provided
by copyright, putting it relatively closer to the public domain. The
BSD licenses have been referred to as copycenter, as a comparison to
standard copyright and copyleft free software: "Take it down to the
copy center and make as many copies as you want."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses

Oh, and would you look at what *else* she had to say:

"Oh, by the way, Solaris isn't BSD, just like Mach (from Apple) isn't
BSD."

"Solaris has its basis in a combination of BSD Unix and AT&T Bell Labs
Unix."

http://www.opensolaris.org/os/article/2005-10-14_a_comparison_of_solaris__linux__and_freebsd_kernels/

"The BSD incorporated into Mac OS X is known as Darwin. It is
available as a completely separate component. Darwin itself is derived
from the BSD layer of the NextStep operating system, developed by
NeXT, the company set up by Steve Jobs after he left Apple in the
1980s. Technically, Mac OS X is based on the FreeBSD core, with OS X
10.3 based on FreeBSD 5.x. It is, however, extremely customized beyond
the base BSD code. The key benefit with Mac OS X is the Aqua GUI that
allows OS X to operate like the original Mac OS operating system but
still have all the benefits and flexibility of an efficient BSD
kernel."

http://www.serverwatch.com/tutorials/article.php/3393051

This is almost too good for words!

You can say that again!

Well, Edwin? What's your response?

Your reliance on any source, no matter how unreliable, that said what
you wanted it to, has been your undoing. As in other threads, you've
turned to poorly researched articles that are too concise (some as
little as a paragraph).

You've made a complete fool of yourself... AGAIN!

.

Relevant Pages

  • Alan Baker is WRONG AGAIN [was Re: Clyde prove Edwin wrong about BSD [was Re: Microsoft Completely V
    ... employer had rights to BSD when Bill Joy wasn't employed at the time ... Bill Joy didn't sell himself his own operating ... It was "Berkeley Systems Division Unix". ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: When will he admit he is wrong?
    ... California (who owned BSD, not Bill Joy), but they also needed one from ... BSD contained AT&T code and required a license from AT&T as ... "The BSD tapes contained AT&T source code and thus required a UNIX ... "The Berkeley copyright poses no restrictions on private or commercial ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Mac OS X and Solaris are the same OS...
    ... Hey Alan, when are you going to tell us who Sun bought their OS from, ... for their workstation and server computer systems. ... based on BSD Unix, while SunOS version 5.0 and later are based on UNIX System ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Heres the REAL reason Apple lost the PC market to IBM:
    ... Sun purchased and OS and then developed it. ... Up through the release of 4.3BSD-Tahoe, all recipients of BSD had to ... first get an AT&T source license. ... never released by Berkeley in a binary-only format; ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: The Number One Macintosh Myth...
    ... Apple used to use Motorola ... All the Maccies who run Windows belie your assertion. ... It is not, and never has been, nothing more than BSD UNIX. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)