decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
You are mistaken | 101 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Agreed
Authored by: Wol on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 04:55 AM EDT
You need to define Operating System, and I defy you to come up with a definition
that would exclude languages. For --- sake BASIC is an Operating System!!!

There's lisp, as has been pointed out, there's Forth, there's Pick, ...

Basically, any language that has been / can be designed to run on "bare
metal" is an operating system. Looking at that list, they seem typically to
be interpreted languages...

Cheers,
Wol

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Well... - Authored by: jesse on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 07:20 AM EDT
You are mistaken
Authored by: bugstomper on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 09:31 AM EDT
I don't have to edit the Title box for my reply :)

There is a big difference between an OS and a computer language. LISP is not an OS. The operating system is the software that controls the underlying hardware of the computer, manages the resources of the system such as memory, use of the cpus, data storage, handles allocation of resources and access security, and so on. LISP does not do any of that. Just because the Lisp Machine's hardware was designed to run LISP, and most of the OS on the LispM was written in LISP, does not mean that LISP was the OS. The Linux kernel is written in C, but that doesn't make C an operating system. It doesn't even mean that the cpus that run Linux have C as their instruction set. The Lisp Machines had a machine language which the LISP compilers compiled to. It just happened to be a machine language quite different from that of the standard machines of the time, a machine language designed to provide instructions that would be useful as a target for LISP compilers.

By the way, you must be mistaken about Franz Lisp on your Lisp computer. Franz Lisp was written for the BSD Unix on the Vax to be an alternative to running LISP on expensive Lisp machines. See the Wikipedia article on Franz Lisp for details, or if you want a more primary source see the article at the Computer History Museum Franz Lisp

If you were on the West Coast you probably were using Interlisp-D on one of the Xerox D... machines (Dorado, Dolphin, Dandelion). Or if you were East Coast, people there tended to use one of Lisp Machines that came out of MIT via Lisp Machines Inc or Symbolics running Zetalisp.

I'm not sure what you mean by the patents being Java oriented, but that could be that I haven't spent enough time reading through the filings, and I'm not likely to. My brain feels dirty just looking up the two OO OS patents that I did, 5,519,867 and 6,275,983.

The first patent comes out of Taligent. That is a company that was spun off as a collaboration between Apple and IBM to develop an object oriented operating system. They were coding in C++. The second patent was filed five years after the first patent. I find it difficult to see the difference between Claim 1 of the two patents. I also don't see how any application written in an object-oriented language that has a run time environment on an ordinary (procedural) operating system would not have all the elements of either Claim 1. Certainly Java came first and covers all the elements of the claims. I couldn't get through all 53 claims of the '867 but a skimming over them didn't reveal anything not in a Lisp Machine, or maybe even in any Java implementation. The second patent is even more of a joke, 22 claims of repetition adding almost nothing to the Claim 1.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )