Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 14 Nov 2000 15:44:41 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
To:        grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey)
Cc:        tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), cfuhrman@tfcci.com (Chris Fuhrman), chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Microsoft Source (fwd)
Message-ID:  <200011141544.IAA19542@usr08.primenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <20001111191459.H4535@sydney.worldwide.lemis.com> from "Greg Lehey" at Nov 11, 2000 07:14:59 PM

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Microsoft announced Xenix on 25 Aug 1980, the same year they
> > signed a contract with IBM to provide compilers for the, at
> > the time, unannounced IBM PC.
> 
> XENIX came first.  I'm sure the announcement was earlier; they had an
> article in the August 1980 Byte.  And my best guess is that the IBM
> deal was done in September 1980.  It was definitely done by November,
> when I heard about it.

See Bill Gate's "timeline for Microsoft" on his personal web site.

> > Most of the original developement was done on Sun equipment,
> 
> What equipment did Sun have in 1980?  Did they even exist?

I believe the equipment was SUN 1 and SUN 2 hardware.  The
one that Microsoft requested product on was a Sun 3 with QIC-11
tape drive, which was the commercial model.


> > and Microsoft was actually running a large chunk of their language
> > engineering on Xenix on Sun machines, as late as 1988 (I got a call
> > from a Microsoft employee wanting to buy a copy of our
> > communications software for Xenix running on Sun hardware; when I
> > said "What?!?", he said "Oh, that's right, it's an internal product
> > only".  Originally, Xenix only ran on 68000 hardware.
> 
> Do you have any evidence for this?  Admittedly, there was 68000
> hardware at the time, but it was very early, and there's no obvious
> reason why Microsoft (which was definitely in charge of XENIX) would
> have bothered to port to an architecture they didn't plan to use,
> especially since it was big-endian and 32 bit, whereas both the PDP-11
> and i86 were little-endian and 16 bit.  I'd suspect that you're
> extrapolating here.

Also on Bill Gates personal web site, and in the "History" section
of the SCO web site.  As a friend of mine is fond of saying "It's
all out there, you just have to know how to find it".  8-).

Actually, I was offered a job in the compiler group at Microsoft
in the late 80's; I probably should have taken it, I'd be, uh,
"more retired" now...


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200011141544.IAA19542>