On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 02:34 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: > Les Mikesell wrote: > > > This doesn't make much sense until the completion of the standalone BSD > > that I thought happened a lot later. Originally you had to have an AT&T > > license to run the BSD additions. And at these prices it's pretty easy > > to see why everyone was running Windows a few years later - I still > > blame AT&T for that. > > Actually, Unix edition 5 was free from Bell Labs, at least to universities. > There was even a microUnix which was supposed to run > on what were then called micro-computers. > But I never heard of anyone actually getting it (microUnix) to run. I saw it running on an LSI-11 (a minimal PDP-11 with no memory manegment). It wasn't much use for anything except data capture as it couldn't have more than 64k of memory. > I recall getting Unix edition 5 on a tape from Bell labs, > with a note attached that the tape was not guaranteed to contain anything. Ditto. Note to the youngsters out there: this was not System V, but pre 6th Edition. Around 1975 I think. > But I didn't think AT&T were allowed to charge anyone for Unix. > I thought there was a legal agreement that AT&T must not sell software, > and IBM must not enter telecommunications. It goes back to the 1956 Consent Decree, under which AT&T was allowed to have a monopoly on the US phone system under condition it never entered any other kind of business. poc -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
