Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 03/09/2007 at 09:25 AM, "Mark H. Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >Seymour, was SVS and/or VS1 what you ran on a 360 or 370 processor >with a DAT box? As shipped, OS/VS1 and OS/VS2 R1 (SVS) ran only on a S/370 with a DAT box[1]. I can't address the question of IBM us

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Bob Halpern wrote: Tss was implemented at Computer Scieces Corp ref: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007f.html#7 IBM S/360 series operating systems history at one time there was this joke about there possibly being 1200 people in mohansic working on tss/360 and total of 12 people at the

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Tss was implemented at Computer Scieces Corp -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anne & Lynn Wheeler Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 11:17 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

with some other features. recent post in this thread: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007f.html#6 IBM S/360 series operating systems history DAT Hardware for 165-II was especially big hit ... there was bunch of stuff in 370 virtual memory architecture (i.e. "redbook" was cms script file,

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

--- Seymour, was SVS and/or VS1 what you ran on a 360 or 370 processor with a DAT box? Or did MVT or MFT run native on those systems with a DAT box? MVT and MFT never knew anything about DAT boxen. IIRC, the only 36

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In a message dated 3/8/2007 2:05:22 P.M. Central Standard Time, _patrick.okeefe @ WAMU.NET_ (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes: I remember 3 different BPSloaders - 3-card, 7-card, and 12-card versions. There very well could have been a

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

cking various pieces from CP67 into MVT kernel. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#27 IBM S/360 series operating systems history so you could sort of say that MVT ran native with a DAT box with a bunch of stuff from CP67 hacked into the MVT kernel ... but they changed its name to SVS. Something si

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 17:33:04 -0500, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>SVS was MVT with Virtual Storage (a 16Meg Machine). > >>VS1 was similarly MFT with VS. > > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT > Atid/2 Seymour, was SVS and

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Patrick O'Keefe wrote: I remember 3 different BPSloaders - 3-card, 7-card, and 12-card versions. There very well could have been a 6-card loader, too. I have no idea what the differences were but I bet the 3-card loader didn't uspport REP cards. IPL does a "02" read operation of 24 bytes at l

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

VM has always shipped with '3CARD LOADER S2' With the advent of XA the number of cards increased to 5. (IBM Mainframe Discussion List) wrote: In a message dated 3/8/2007 2:05:22 P.M. Central Standard Time, _patrick.okeefe @ WAMU.NET_ (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes: I remember 3 diff

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In a message dated 3/8/2007 2:05:22 P.M. Central Standard Time, _patrick.okeefe @ WAMU.NET_ (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes: >I remember 3 different BPSloaders - 3-card, 7-card, and 12-card versions. There very well could have been a 6-card loader, too. I may have had a brain check. I

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 03/03/2007 at 12:31 AM, "Robert A. Rosenberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >SVS was MVT with Virtual Storage (a 16Meg Machine). To some extent, but there were some significant changes to exploit paging, e.g., SVS was TACTless. >so there was a limit on the total combine

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 03/01/2007 at 09:09 AM, "Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >My recollection is that the original virtual storage announcement for >S/370 already used the term MVS for OS/VS2 R2. C 'MVS' 'AOS' -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 03/02/2007 at 11:35 PM, "Robert A. Rosenberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >DOS/360 started with the name BOS-16k and was renamed as DOS at some >release level. My recollection is that DOS/360 was intended as an interim system until BOS-16K was stable, but that "interi

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 07:55:03 -0500, Charles Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >... >And I *think* that DOS was always DOS. I *think* that BOS was something >else. >... I know/knew nothing of BOS internals, but the JCL looked nothing like DOS JCL. (I think a JCL statement started with a single slas

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: the consolidation of some of the HONE vm370 datacenters provided opportunity for development of vm370 "single-system-image" support with front-end load-balancing and availability infrastructure directing branch office logon to specific processor. The mechanism utilize

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

riginal Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert A. Rosenberg Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 11:36 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history DOS/360 started with the name BOS-16k and was renamed as DOS at some

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

At 18:53 -0500 on 02/28/2007, (IBM Mainframe Discussion List) wrote about Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history: MVT was first virtualized in early 1974 as OS/VS2 Release 1, better known as SVS (Single Virtual Storage). A fuller version, OS/VS2 Release 2, was available a year or so

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

At 15:08 -0800 on 02/20/2007, Charles Mills wrote about Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history: TOS was a piece of work! Every time you linkedited a program (all executable programs in DOS/TOS in those days lived in SYSRES) it copied the SYSRES from tape to tape, kind of like a "

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

At 13:05 -0500 on 02/19/2007, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote about Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history: Second, you list "releases" of OS/360 that have nothing to do with OS/360: "OS/360 BOS-8k", "OS/360 BPS", "OS/360 TOS", "OS/360 BOS-16

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

At 20:55 -0500 on 02/20/2007, Thompson, Steve wrote about Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history: I had a friend who worked for Holiday Inns at Holiday City in Memphis back about 1977 where they were still running TOS (I think he had 128K) with 2311 disk drives (if I remember the model

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

At 18:22 +1100 on 02/19/2007, Ken Brick wrote about Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history: DOS/VS R27 1972-73 timeframe - check when the small 370'e (135 & 145) become available That was DOS/370 R27. It was NOT a VS system (that was R28 I think). This ran on 370 135/145 B

Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark L. Wheeler Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 7:46 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on 03/02/2007 04:35:23 PM: > The limit for CKD volumes is a little more than 5

Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

information. > >-Original Message- >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Behalf Of Edward Jaffe >Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 4:13 PM >To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU >Subject: Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history > > &g

Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on 03/02/2007 04:35:23 PM: > The limit for CKD volumes is a little more than 54GB. I come up with a > number closer to 500GB. Past that and IBM will need to go to logical > volumes on a physical volume. The reason is the CCHHR count field. > > Max CC is

Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 16:35:23 -0600, Blaicher, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The limit for CKD volumes is a little more than 54GB. I come up with a >number closer to 500GB. Past that and IBM will need to go to logical >volumes on a physical volume. The reason is the CCHHR count field. > >Max

Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Blaicher, Chris wrote: The limit for CKD volumes is a little more than 54GB. I come up with a number closer to 500GB. Past that and IBM will need to go to logical volumes on a physical volume. The reason is the CCHHR count field. Max CC is , which give 65536 cylinders (don't forget cylind

Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Blaicher, Chris wrote: The limit for CKD volumes is a little more than 54GB. I come up with a number closer to 500GB. Past that and IBM will need to go to logical volumes on a physical volume. The reason is the CCHHR count field. Max CC is , which give 65536 cylinders (don't forget cylind

Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

day, March 02, 2007 4:13 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history I agree with you Clark re: the short-sightedness of not supporting FBA in MVS. Because of that dumb decision, z/OS is the only mainframe operating system left in the 21

Re: FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Clark Morris wrote: So the jackasses will have cost the company far more than the 20 million dollars by their opposition. Does anyone really think that 54 gigabytes per volume is going to be other than totally inadequate in the next ten years? Laptops now have 100 gigabytes and up on a single d

FBA rant was Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:29:28 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >Phil Payne wrote: >> They had Memorex Double Density 3350s with IDI - "Intelligent Dual >> Interface". Was ever >> anything so inappropriately named? A status bus parity check - a common >> occurence - caused >> all IDI-l

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Phil, I'd LOVE to find the source code for those systems, to add to my "archives". Phil Payne wrote: SVS was bizarrely popular in Germany, and lived on there for longer than almost anywhere. IBM Bonn produced an _excellent_ SVS 1.7K DLIB tape that really was well sorted out and I had over

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Phil Payne wrote: They had Memorex Double Density 3350s with IDI - "Intelligent Dual Interface". Was ever anything so inappropriately named? A status bus parity check - a common occurence - caused all IDI-linked controllers to forget all owed interrupts. Total system hang. SVS had a MIH, b

IBM S/360 series operating systems history

SVS was bizarrely popular in Germany, and lived on there for longer than almost anywhere. IBM Bonn produced an _excellent_ SVS 1.7K DLIB tape that really was well sorted out and I had over a dozen customers using it. One customer - Maizena in Heilbronn, part of Knorr and manufacturers of the G

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Don't know about MFT, but MVT was reclassified as Class C (meaning frozen, > no more new releases, no more fixes) in November, 1977. I continued working > with it and other OS/360 variants off and on until late 1983. It wasn't com

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Patrick O'Keefe wrote: My experience with DOS preceeded DOS/VSE (and DOS/VS), but as I recall, the linkage conventions for DOS and OS (including pre-MVS) were identical. The difference was that the main routine was entered using a different set (or maybe no set) of conventions - no R13 for save

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:53:30 EST, IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >... >you put the 6-card BPS IPL deck ... I remember 3 different BPSloaders - 3-card, 7-card, and 12-card versions. There very well could have been a 6-card loader, too. I have no idea what the difference

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Shmuel Metz wrote: > My recollection is that the original virtual storage announcement for > S/370 already used the term MVS for OS/VS2 R2. My recollection is that IBM pushed the term OS/VS2 Release 2, to avoid suggesting that it was much different from Release 1 (SVS). > However, you will still

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

--- Unlike most new threads that end up in ancient history and then have to be killed, this one starts out with ancient history! What an opportunity for us Jurassic-types. Since I was non-email-capable for two weeks, I read all old posts before ad

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

, lower-used application data pages. lots of past posts related to page replacement algorithms http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#wsclock as well as old email on the same subject http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#globallru past posts in this thread: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/28/2007 at 06:53 PM, "(IBM Mainframe Discussion List)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >Don't know about MFT, but MVT was reclassified as Class C (meaning >frozen, no more new releases, no more fixes) in November, 1977. MVT was just an OS/360 sysgen option. It was OS

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Unlike most new threads that end up in ancient history and then have to be killed, this one starts out with ancient history! What an opportunity for us Jurassic-types. Since I was non-email-capable for two weeks, I read all old posts before adding my 2 cents' worth, which embody responses t

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/23/2007 at 03:02 PM, "Patrick O'Keefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >I'm not sure why you mentioned the s370/125. As far as I know the >s360/25 ad the s370/125 were true members of the s/360 and s/370 >families ... The 360/25 was a true S/360. The only S/370 model t

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 20:18:40 +1100, Ken Brick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Patrick O'Keefe wrote: >>... >> It didn't even bother to pretend its linkage conventions were the same as >> s/360. It used something other than the s/360 linkage instructions BAL >> and BALR (BAS and BASR, as I recall).

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 1:08 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 11:03:10 -0700, Anne & Lynn Wheeler w

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 11:03:10 -0700, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ken Brick) writes: >> My recollection is that S/360/30 didn't support EDMK and TRT > >functional characteristics documents from bitsavers: >http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/360/funcChar/ > >and 360/30 functional cha

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

om/~lynn/2007d.html#48 IBM S/360 series operating systems history http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007d.html#51 IBM S/360 series operating systems history http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007d.html#65 IBM S/360 series operating systems history --

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Thompson, Steve wrote: > I rarely called other programs, but when I did, I used the basic > protocols (R0-R1, R13-R15) with STM/LM, but using halfwords. > > When calling subroutines, R15 was the entry point, R14 the return address but I forget how parameters could be passed. I suspect that we us

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Patrick O'Keefe wrote: > As I recall, some of the "registers" actually had hard-coded values; > they could be used as base registers but little else. I have no idea > what happened if you tried storing into them. That alone supports your > "grossly incompatable" assertion. > It didn't even bot

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick O'Keefe Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 2:56 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history As I recall, some of the "registers" ac

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:27:59 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: >... >It was the only one that was grossly incompatible. The others may have >been missing instructions but the instructions they did have behaved >in accordance with S/360 PoOps. >... As I recall, some of the "registers" actual

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/21/2007 at 06:21 PM, Ken Brick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >IBM called it a System 360. It had many things in common with other >S/360's and many peculiarities of it's own. It wasn't the only S/360 >that had differences from the norm. It was the only one that was gr

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/20/2007 at 03:08 PM, Charles Mills said: >I think there may have been some other subsetting also. For example, >I suspect there was no problem program disk support either. (No >"QSAM.") I don't know about BPS and BOS, but DOS and TOS had access methods. The source

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Thompson, Steve wrote: > /snip > And to someone else's post about this, an assembly took all 4 of our > tape drives, and the minimal assembly (NO macros) took 30 minutes (give > or take about 15 seconds). Most of that was just initializing things on > the work tapes!!! I say that because I used: >

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Mills Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:08 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history TOS was a piece of work! Every time you linkedited a

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

MAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 12:53 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/19/2007 at 12:11 PM, Charles Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >Only i

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Thanks for all the feedback. Reviewing the information I currently have I realised that I have been approaching the very early OSes in slightly the wrong way and have added a new page covering early OSes on IBM hardware. I will work on merging the new information into the magor timeline shortly.

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/19/2007 at 01:08 PM, Kirk Talman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >IBSYS was the operating system of the IBM 7094 and probably the 7090 >7070 7074. (36 bit word machine) Nope; the 709, 7040, 7044, 9090 and 7094 weree 36 bit machines and ran IBSYS; the 7070, 7072 and 707

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/20/2007 at 10:05 AM, "Steele, Phil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >As I recall BPS stood for Basic Programming Support, ( not System) That's certainly true for BPS/360, but the 360/20 was not a S/360 and needed its own software. Are you sure that the 360/20 BPS had th

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/19/2007 at 12:11 PM, Charles Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >Only if a tape is essentially the same as a disk! The loader, library routines et al are only a tiny fraction of the code base. >but the SYSRES was on tape! Isn't that what I wrote? "with a tape load

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

-- You have also missed some small relatively insignificant OS's. TPS (Tape Programming System) DPS (Disk Programming System) BPS (Basic Programming System although it might have been CPS for Card) These all run on the System360/20 machines. --

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Brick Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 1:26 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history You have also missed some small relatively insignificant OS&#

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: i had summer student programming job ... developing 360 port of 1401 MPIO front-end for 709 (univ. used 1401 for cardreader -> tape and tape -> printer/pubnch front-end for 709 ibsys). as part of move to 360 ... So, you are the one! When I got to FNB Lubbock in th

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

M >To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU >Subject: Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history > >You have also missed some small relatively insignificant OS's. > >TPS (Tape Programming System) >DPS (Disk Programming System) >BPS (Basic Programming System although it might have

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Charles Mills wrote: TOS/360, as noted above, is essentially the same as DOS/360. Only if a tape is essentially the same as a disk! TOS's code base was largely common with DOS, and the programming APIs were a subset -- but the SYSRES was on tape! Believe it or not. The equivalent of an S806 to

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On 19 Feb 2007 10:08:45 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >IBSYS was the operating system of the IBM 7094 and probably the 7090 7070 >7074. (36 bit word machine) I think you mean 7040 (there may have been a 7044). The 707x series was based on a 10 decimal digit word. > >There was an ear

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

GB or more of storage. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 10:06 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history >VSE - Missing ve

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/18/2007 at 08:24 PM, Patrick Mulvany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >MVS - Mainly missing clarification of the 1960-1972 period >http://www.oshistory.net/metadot/index.pl?id=2238;isa=Category;op=show There are some serious errors. First, while OS/360 derived some conc

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/19/2007 at 06:22 PM, Ken Brick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >Last DOS/VS R35 probably 1982 to be followed by the VSE series >(probably when the 4331/4341 become available) Yes; DOS/VSE was announced concurrently with ECPS:VSE, which was initially only available on th

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

My apologies to Kirk Talman for rechristening him Kurt without authlorization. John Gilmore Ashland, MA 01721-1817 USA _ Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - Refinance $150,000 loan for $579 a month. Intro*Terms http://www.NexTag.co

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Kurt Talman wrote: IBSYS was the operating system of the IBM 7094 and probably the 7090 7070 7074. (36 bit word machine) There was an early version(s) of OS that ran on the 7094. Two corrections: o Strike IBM 7070 and 7074; they were very different, business not scientific machines; and

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

IBSYS was the operating system of the IBM 7094 and probably the 7090 7070 7074. (36 bit word machine) There was an early version(s) of OS that ran on the 7094. The original "production" version of OS was PCP (primary control program?). It was used on the 360/75 at Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

You have also missed some small relatively insignificant OS's. TPS (Tape Programming System) DPS (Disk Programming System) BPS (Basic Programming System although it might have been CPS for Card ) These all run on the System360/20 machines. Ken --

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Patrick Mulvany wrote: > Over the past few years I have been putting together a history > timeline of > operating systems. This is a very large task especially as a lot of the > information about the early operating systems is quickly disappearing. > /snip > /unsip > VSE - Missing very early histor

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On 18 Feb 2007 12:24:48 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >Over the past few years I have been putting together a history timeline of >operating systems. This is a very large task especially as a lot of the >information about the early operating systems is quickly disappearing. > >A major

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

On Sunday 18 February 2007 15:24, Patrick Mulvany wrote: > (...) A major part of this is the IBMs S/360 family of hardware and > the operating systems that have running on it over the years. > http://www.oshistory.net/metadot/index.pl?id=2195 > > All information welcome, especially corrections,

Re: IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Patrick Mulvany wrote: Over the past few years I have been putting together a history timeline of operating systems. This is a very large task especially as a lot of the information about the early operating systems is quickly disappearing. A major part of this is the IBMs S/360 family of hardwa

IBM S/360 series operating systems history

Over the past few years I have been putting together a history timeline of operating systems. This is a very large task especially as a lot of the information about the early operating systems is quickly disappearing. A major part of this is the IBMs S/360 family of hardware and the operating sys