Re: ACP/TPF

Paul Hinman <paul.hinman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> He was a gutless wonder who would never have made a suggestion to take
> a radical approach, he was part of the group that decided not to
> select IMS because our shop would never go to a virtual memory
> operating system (which it did, of course).

recent post mentioning vs/repack ... it was used by a number of
cor****ate product groups helping migrate from real storage paradigm to
virtual ... including exensively used by the group developing and
sup****ting IMS.
http:://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007o.html#53
Virtual Storage implementation

vs/repack had been developed at the cambridge science center
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech

which was also responsible for cp40, a virtual machine operating
system built on a modified 360/40 with virtual memory hardware.  cp40
was then morphed into cp67 with the availability of 360/67 with
standard virtual memory sup****t.

gml was also invented at the science center in 1969 ... precusor to
sgml, html, xml, etc
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#sgml

and the technology for internal network was also developed at
the science center
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet

which was later used in the academic bitnet and earn networks
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet