Running Unix programs under LispOS
Fri, 02 May 1997 21:55:24 +0100
At 07:43 02/05/97 -0700, Bill House wrote:
>>Change the world first, THEN force everybody to chuck out the old OS.
>I think you've got it right. LispOS needs to be useful to people working in
>existing environments. As an application server, we've got the field data to
>prove that Lisp systems can be successful, so I think KEM's silkServer
>has lots of merit.
>However, few installations are going to dedicate a machine to something that
>requires rebooting (or reinstallation) to do anything else. So, KEM's
>running under WinNT, would be the easiest to sell. A UNIX flavor would be
>preferable to some shops, but non-UNIX shops would be inclined to nix it,
>on the basis of not being NT.
Such places exist. I used to like the "virtual OS" idea a lot, back when it
was popular amoung CP/M users. (Remember them?) Perhaps something
like it could work today, with Unix, and NT. The Cygnus Software people
have done a lot to make this possible, via the cygwin.dll and the various
GNU tools. A number of non-C development tools now use it, too. I'd love
to see a Win32 port of CMUCL...
>To get around this Catch-22, you might be able to take the same approach that
>MS did when they were fighting to infiltrate the heavily-Netware corporate
>market. They wrote a Netware services emulator and gave it away with NT. Now,
>people are using NT as a cheaper, more functional substitute for additional
>servers on their Netware LANs. Do the same with LispOS -- support all the
>external connectivity options you can: CORBA, DCOM, Netware FS, NetBios,
>TCP/IP, etc. If LispOS is obsessed with connectivity, then how it's built
>won't matter. If I can browse the "file" system from Win95, LispOS wins.
I think of this as the "meme attack". If people insist on Netware, then
give 'em Netware protocols. If they insist on Unix, give them Unix (i.e.
TCP/IP) protocols. Same for APIs, like POSIX. MS are "selling" NT
as a Unix! By "selling", I mean exploiting the memes. Some people are
"selling" NT as a Java OS. We could "sell" NT as a LispOS.
We could also "sell" Linux as a LispOS. This has already been
discussed. The other option that is being considered is "selling"
a LispOS as a LispOS. Would that be the easiest, best option?
I don't know, but perhaps some other people here do. I've been
lurking in the hope that a conclusion might soon be reached.
<URL:http://www.wildcard.demon.co.uk> You can never browse enough
Future generations are relying on us
It's a world we've made - Incubus
We're living on a knife edge, looking for the ground -- Hawkwind