• Apollo Computer

    From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@3:633/280.2 to All on Sat Nov 23 18:40:18 2024
    I was looking at the Apollo Archive <https://jim.rees.org/apollo-archive/>
    to find out more about this former player in the turbulent Unix
    workstation market. They offered some powerful graphics hardware, with
    their own proprietary 3D API, almost I think on a par with SGI in its
    early days. Another distinguishing characteristic was the highly
    integrated networking among different workstation nodes.

    They were founded in 1980, and initially their hardware ran a proprietary
    OS called “Aegis” (which they described as “object-oriented”, with its own
    proprietary GUI), on their own CPU architecture (described as “bit- sliced”). (I think these were the products with 3-digit model numbers,
    e.g. 460, 660.) Then within a few years they moved to Motorola 68020/68030 processors (and 4-digit model numbers, e.g. 3500, 4500). Also they started using the name “Domain” for their software stack; I think initially this just referred to the network system; then this became “Domain/OS” for the whole OS, which offered both BSD and AT&T Unix as “personalities” (my term, not theirs) on top of the core, in addition to the older Aegis
    support. Later, I think, when Aegis was abandoned, the OS became “Domain/ IX”, which was a totally Unix-based system.

    In 1988 or so, they introduced their first RISC-based machine, the Series 10000 “Personal Supercomputer”. This ran an architecture they called “PRISM”, and was fabulously expensive -- up to a 6-figure price tag. Their less-expensive “personal workstations” (with only a 5-figure price tag) were still using Motorola processors, while most of the other Unix
    workstation vendors were already moving large parts of their product
    ranges to RISC.

    Looking at brochures from this date, I still cannot see any mention of X11 support -- looks like they were still sticking to their own proprietary
    GUI, when most of their competitors were quick to adopt the new open
    standard for this.

    Then, at some point, they got acquired by HP, no doubt as a result of
    their struggles to stay competitive in a fast-changing marketplace. In the above archives, in some update files grouped by year from 1991 onwards, I
    see subdirectories labeled “a88k” and “m68k”. So it looks like, not only
    were they still supporting (and therefore still selling?) machines based
    on Motorola 68000-family processors, but they were now using Motorola’s 88000 RISC processor as well -- their fourth CPU architecture, by my
    count.

    Wasn’t PRISM good enough? Was it too expensive, maybe? From what I’ve heard, the 88000 family weren’t particularly wonderful performance-wise, which is why hardly anybody made use of them. So, after dragging their
    feet over Unix and then X11 support, yet another in a series of
    questionable strategic decisions from the company? Which is why, after a
    few more years, it ceased to exist altogether.

    --- MBSE BBS v1.0.8.4 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From John Dallman@3:633/280.2 to All on Sat Nov 23 19:23:00 2024
    In article <vhs0t2$1k6ft$1@dont-email.me>, ldo@nz.invalid (Lawrence
    D'Oliveiro) wrote:

    They were founded in 1980, and initially their hardware ran a
    proprietary OS called _Aegis_ (which they described as
    _object-oriented_, with its own proprietary GUI), on their own CPU architecture (described as _bit-sliced_).

    Wikipedia reckons they started with 68000, and the bit-slice CPUs were
    their own implementation of 68000. They seem to have been keen to spend
    money on hardware, since their method of handling page faults on their 68000-based machine was to have another 68000 to handle them. This wasn't needed with their 68010 and later machines

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo/Domain>

    Looking at brochures from this date, I still cannot see any mention
    of X11 support -- looks like they were still sticking to their own proprietary GUI, when most of their competitors were quick to adopt
    the new open standard for this.

    The comp.sys.apollo FAQ reckons they had X11 at some point:

    <https://web.mit.edu/kolya/www/csa-faq.html>

    Wasn't PRISM good enough? Was it too expensive, maybe?

    Too expensive, it seems. A "personal workstation" at up to $100,000 was a
    very high price in the late 1980s. They sold about a thousand PRISM
    machines:

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_PRISM#History>

    John

    --- MBSE BBS v1.0.8.4 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From John Levine@3:633/280.2 to All on Sun Nov 24 04:31:48 2024
    According to John Dallman <jgd@cix.co.uk>:
    In article <vhs0t2$1k6ft$1@dont-email.me>, ldo@nz.invalid (Lawrence >D'Oliveiro) wrote:

    They were founded in 1980, and initially their hardware ran a
    proprietary OS called _Aegis_ (which they described as
    _object-oriented_, with its own proprietary GUI), on their own CPU
    architecture (described as _bit-sliced_).

    Wikipedia reckons they started with 68000, and the bit-slice CPUs were
    their own implementation of 68000. They seem to have been keen to spend
    money on hardware, since their method of handling page faults on their >68000-based machine was to have another 68000 to handle them. This wasn't >needed with their 68010 and later machines

    That matches my recollection. There was a bug in the 68K that made it impossible
    to recover from a page fault so Apollo came up with a kludge that froze the main
    CPU and switched to the other one. Later 68K chips didn't have the problem so one CPU was enough.

    It is also my recollection that they waited a long time before switching from their own system to Unix. Their system was pretty good but it didn't have all that software or prople who knew how to write programs for it.

    --
    Regards,
    John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
    Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

    --- MBSE BBS v1.0.8.4 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: Taughannock Networks (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From John Dallman@3:633/280.2 to All on Sun Nov 24 07:56:00 2024
    In article <vht3i4$19bt$1@gal.iecc.com>, johnl@taugh.com (John Levine)
    wrote:

    It is also my recollection that they waited a long time before
    switching from their own system to Unix. Their system was pretty
    good but it didn't have all that software or prople who knew how
    to write programs for it.

    My employers supported it, but gave up long before I joined them. There
    are still people there who use "ale", the Apollo-Like Editor, and some platform-specific code for Apollo in the product I work on.

    John

    --- MBSE BBS v1.0.8.4 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From George Musk@3:633/280.2 to All on Sun Nov 24 20:30:28 2024
    On Sat, 23 Nov 2024 20:56 +0000 (GMT Standard Time), John Dallman wrote:

    are still people there who use "ale", the Apollo-Like Editor, and some

    Is it something different than
    https://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ARPUS_Ce
    ? Can't find it.

    --- MBSE BBS v1.0.8.4 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: BWH Usenet Archive (https://usenet.blueworldho (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Malcolm Purvis@3:633/280.2 to All on Sun Nov 24 22:04:29 2024
    "Lawrence" == Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:

    Looking at brochures from this date, I still cannot see any
    mention of X11 support -- looks like they were still sticking to
    their own proprietary GUI, when most of their competitors were
    quick to adopt the new open standard for this.

    Full X11 support arrived with their SR10 OS release around 1988,
    which introduced their Domain/OS name and OS personalities.

    I was a 4 year student at the University of NSW in Sydney
    Australia when the Computer Science department replaced the
    student VAXen and PDP11s with a large number of Apollo machines.
    The remnants of their original OS caused great confusion to a
    school who were more used to UNIX v7.

    They were all decommissioned 4 years later. I bought one of the
    more powerful workstations, full docs and OS tapes for AU$500
    because nobody else wanted it.

    Malcolm

    --
    Malcolm Purvis <malcolm@purvis.id.au>

    --- MBSE BBS v1.0.8.4 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From John Dallman@3:633/280.2 to All on Sun Nov 24 22:29:00 2024
    In article <vhurnk$27cl$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>,
    grgmusk@skiff.com (George Musk) wrote:

    are still people there who use "ale", the Apollo-Like Editor
    Is it something different than https://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ARPUS_Ce

    It's different: one they wrote themselves in the late 1980s.

    John

    --- MBSE BBS v1.0.8.4 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Scott Lurndal@3:633/280.2 to All on Mon Nov 25 00:44:21 2024
    Reply-To: slp53@pacbell.net

    jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) writes:
    In article <vht3i4$19bt$1@gal.iecc.com>, johnl@taugh.com (John Levine)
    wrote:

    It is also my recollection that they waited a long time before
    switching from their own system to Unix. Their system was pretty
    good but it didn't have all that software or prople who knew how
    to write programs for it.

    My employers supported it, but gave up long before I joined them. There
    are still people there who use "ale", the Apollo-Like Editor, and some >platform-specific code for Apollo in the product I work on.


    We had a bunch of Apollo workstations at Burroughs in the 80's; they
    were exclusively used for hardware description language development
    for ECL gate arrays. They were eventually replaced with Solbourne sun-compatable workstations.

    --- MBSE BBS v1.0.8.4 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: UsenetServer - www.usenetserver.com (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Johnny Billquist@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Dec 3 11:31:46 2024
    Gah! Horrible memories.

    Their window system was the weirdest thing with the terminal window
    having a special sub-window where you wrote your input. The point
    pointer and the window cursor was actually the same, and things behaved
    in very weird ways.

    Aegis had some cool ideas though. The file system was networked, and you
    had the machines a level above the root directory, and soft links could contain environment variables that got expanded when you actually used
    them, so you could have file system entries that pointed in different
    ways depending on which machine or environment you were on.

    But then Apollo was also very fond of using token networks, which were *really* bad.

    JOhnny

    On 2024-11-23 08:40, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    I was looking at the Apollo Archive <https://jim.rees.org/apollo-archive/>
    to find out more about this former player in the turbulent Unix
    workstation market. They offered some powerful graphics hardware, with
    their own proprietary 3D API, almost I think on a par with SGI in its
    early days. Another distinguishing characteristic was the highly
    integrated networking among different workstation nodes.

    They were founded in 1980, and initially their hardware ran a proprietary
    OS called “Aegis” (which they described as “object-oriented”, with its own
    proprietary GUI), on their own CPU architecture (described as “bit- sliced”). (I think these were the products with 3-digit model numbers,
    e.g. 460, 660.) Then within a few years they moved to Motorola 68020/68030 processors (and 4-digit model numbers, e.g. 3500, 4500). Also they started using the name “Domain” for their software stack; I think initially this just referred to the network system; then this became “Domain/OS” for the whole OS, which offered both BSD and AT&T Unix as “personalities” (my term, not theirs) on top of the core, in addition to the older Aegis
    support. Later, I think, when Aegis was abandoned, the OS became “Domain/ IX”, which was a totally Unix-based system.

    In 1988 or so, they introduced their first RISC-based machine, the Series 10000 “Personal Supercomputer”. This ran an architecture they called “PRISM”, and was fabulously expensive -- up to a 6-figure price tag. Their
    less-expensive “personal workstations” (with only a 5-figure price tag) were still using Motorola processors, while most of the other Unix workstation vendors were already moving large parts of their product
    ranges to RISC.

    Looking at brochures from this date, I still cannot see any mention of X11 support -- looks like they were still sticking to their own proprietary
    GUI, when most of their competitors were quick to adopt the new open
    standard for this.

    Then, at some point, they got acquired by HP, no doubt as a result of
    their struggles to stay competitive in a fast-changing marketplace. In the above archives, in some update files grouped by year from 1991 onwards, I
    see subdirectories labeled “a88k” and “m68k”. So it looks like, not only
    were they still supporting (and therefore still selling?) machines based
    on Motorola 68000-family processors, but they were now using Motorola’s 88000 RISC processor as well -- their fourth CPU architecture, by my
    count.

    Wasn’t PRISM good enough? Was it too expensive, maybe? From what I’ve heard, the 88000 family weren’t particularly wonderful performance-wise, which is why hardly anybody made use of them. So, after dragging their
    feet over Unix and then X11 support, yet another in a series of
    questionable strategic decisions from the company? Which is why, after a
    few more years, it ceased to exist altogether.


    --- MBSE BBS v1.0.8.4 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: MGT Consulting (3:633/280.2@fidonet)
  • From Lynn Wheeler@3:633/280.2 to All on Tue Dec 3 11:51:22 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
    Wasn’t PRISM good enough? Was it too expensive, maybe? From what I’ve heard, the 88000 family weren’t particularly wonderful performance-wise, which is why hardly anybody made use of them. So, after dragging their
    feet over Unix and then X11 support, yet another in a series of
    questionable strategic decisions from the company? Which is why, after a
    few more years, it ceased to exist altogether.


    POWER/RIOS (six chip) chipset didn't support multiprocessor cache
    coherency so scale-up was cluster. Executive we reported to (when doing HA/CMP), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_High_Availability_Cluster_Multiprocessing

    then went over to head up Somerset (i.e. AIM; apple, ibm, motorola)
    single-chip processor and I somewhat characterize as adding motorola 88k
    risc multiprocessor cache coherency ... then can have large scalable
    clusters of multiprocessor systems (rather than just clusters of single processor systems)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM_alliance https://wiki.preterhuman.net/The_Somerset_Design_Center https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Power_microprocessors#PowerPC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_88000
    In the early 1990s Motorola joined the AIM effort to create a new RISC architecture based on the IBM POWER architecture. They worked a few
    features of the 88000 (such as a compatible bus interface[10]) into
    the new PowerPC architecture to offer their customer base some sort of
    upgrade path. At that point the 88000 was dumped as soon as possible


    --
    virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

    --- MBSE BBS v1.0.8.4 (Linux-x86_64)
    * Origin: Wheeler&Wheeler (3:633/280.2@fidonet)