🚀 go-pugleaf

Marcus J. "Buddy can you spare a clue?" Ranum:
>	What *IS* an "Open System"??

Gee, that sounds like my cue.  I'll give my usual commentary first and
then elaborate a bit.  "Open Systems" is a command; "Open" is a verb.
You can probably guess what vendors mean when they utter it (it's aimed at
your wallet).

The last open system I used actively was a VAX 750; the hardware was
documented sufficiently well that one could write operating system code
for it (without having to beg, grovel, sign non-disclosure agreements,
bribe your vendor, sue your vendor, or sell your soul to the devil).

I'm told that 386 systems tend to be pretty well documented (allegedly due
to competition), but I can't vouch for that claim.  I do know that the
Sun systems I've used since that VAX 750 have had miserable hardware
documentation; the situation is improving slightly only because Sun is
now using more third-party hardware in their systems, and you can buy the
documentation from the third parties.  The SGI systems I have used are
essentially undocumented: the processor manual (the Kane book) can be
bought on the open market, but the rest of the system (notably the kernel
virtual address map) is undocumented.  (MIPS looked promising, but they
don't make computer systems any more.)

Of course vendors don't care about this stuff now.  `Just buy our Open
System and run our wonderful software and all your problems will be
solved.' `But your software stinks; I just want to use the hardware and
write my own software.' `Sorry, the hardware in our Open System is a
proprietary secret.' `My oxymorometer just went off; don't call us, we
won't call you.'
-- 
Geoff Collyer		world.std.com!geoff, uunet.uu.net!geoff

``Leave the evil grasping to us.'' - A. L. Arms, UNIX licensing, WECo.