Re[4]: Thoughts on the book: DEC is dead, long live DEC

Re[4]: Thoughts on the book: DEC is dead, long live DEC

Post by Valentin L » Tue, 05 Sep 2006 15:36:28



OS/360 and IBM hardware was cloned before, IIRC. So DEC was not the
first.

--
Best regards,
Valentin
valentin.likoum at ncc dot volga dot ru
 
 
 

Re[4]: Thoughts on the book: DEC is dead, long live DEC

Post by bill » Wed, 06 Sep 2006 00:32:20

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
Valentin Likoum < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:


I can't imagine why Russia would have bothered trying to clone the VAX
as even with the technology sanctions in place they had no problem getting
the real thing. I even remember a company that posted a long explanation of
how they got around the sanctions by having their Swiss branch buy the VAX,
making an intra-company transfer to India (who had not signed the agreement
sanctioning high-tech products headed for the USSR) and then selling them
as used computer gear to the Russians, They were rather proud of their
closed market.

And, with Unix making the trip in diplomatic pouches (I always thought it
rather humorous that our allies could not have the version of Unix with
DES but after the fall of the Iron Curtain we learned that the Russians
had it for years.) I would imagine so did VMS.

bill


--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
XXXX@XXXXX.COM | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>

 
 
 

Re[4]: Thoughts on the book: DEC is dead, long live DEC

Post by koehle » Wed, 06 Sep 2006 22:40:20

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >, XXXX@XXXXX.COM (Bill Gunshannon) writes:


They bothered to clone the VAX because they did have problems getting
the real thing. Working around US export controls could be more of a
problem than cloning. The Russians did both, and I'm not sure
they'll ever bother to figure out which worked better for them.