> At another shop, we had 2 50s, one running DOS and the other OS with HASP.
Nowadays it's worth mentioning that that "DOS" has nothing to do with MS-DOS/PC-DOS on PCs (or any other DOS on any other microcomputer where the names may coincide).
The release dates of the IBM PC and System/360 being closer together than the IBM PC is old today, and the mainframe world being so secluded from mainstream computing, I wouldn't be too surprised if someone thought there were s/360s with an "A:\>" prompt on a teletype somewhere. :)
To the rest of the story, I cannot find the original quote no matter how I search (I'm sure it's out there, Google has just become increasingly worse lately), but I remember a story in a single paragraph of someone who contacted CDC or IBM or whatever, about a seemingly misbehaving instruction. The engineers replied that this was curious, as the instruction in question was usually one of the more stable instructions. That day, the person asking learned that apparently, machine code instructions can be ordered by reliability.
Nowadays it's worth mentioning that that "DOS" has nothing to do with MS-DOS/PC-DOS on PCs (or any other DOS on any other microcomputer where the names may coincide).
The release dates of the IBM PC and System/360 being closer together than the IBM PC is old today, and the mainframe world being so secluded from mainstream computing, I wouldn't be too surprised if someone thought there were s/360s with an "A:\>" prompt on a teletype somewhere. :)
To the rest of the story, I cannot find the original quote no matter how I search (I'm sure it's out there, Google has just become increasingly worse lately), but I remember a story in a single paragraph of someone who contacted CDC or IBM or whatever, about a seemingly misbehaving instruction. The engineers replied that this was curious, as the instruction in question was usually one of the more stable instructions. That day, the person asking learned that apparently, machine code instructions can be ordered by reliability.