🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BuCytz.1IG@world.std.com> geoff@world.std.com (Geoff Collyer) writes:
>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).
>Geoff Collyer		world.std.com!geoff, uunet.uu.net!geoff



If Open is intended to mean accessable then the hardware (as described
above) must be documented, the standard system software (including compilers
and assemblers) should be documented and available in source form for a
reasonable price and tcp/ip/whatever network interface must be
available/documented/etc.  

The trouble is Open has been taken over by the marketing droids and who
knows what it means now?

(BTW I don't expect ALL the s/w to be available in source form, just the
basic stuff.  If some company has worked hard to create an enhanced C
compiler with, for instance, really nifty code optimization technique then
they probably deserve to keep it to themselves for a while -- so long as the
old C compiler remains available and usable.) 

  
-- 
Geoff. Lane.                                  Janet: zzassgl@uk.ac.mcc.uts
UTS Sys Admin, Manchester Computing Centre, Oxford Rd, Manchester, M13 9PL