Live data from Hacker News

Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

lispm.de

71–80 of 94 posts

Re: Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

#71
post #21

Out of curiosity, what were things that these systems did poorly or that we know not to do these days?

Security was literally nonexistent. If you were at the console, you had control of the machine. Pwning one over the network was probably not difficult, though it wasn't the kind of thing people spent much time on back then.

But given the level of expertise which would have supposedly been their target market, wouldn't this have been an ideal environment for security analysts to develop within?

If you buy into the sales pitch, highly trained teams of developers would be properly outfitted with workstations well-suited to roll their own crypto, for development purposes, and then easily test against a wide array of complex scenarios.

Re: Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

#72
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you are aware that this is proprietary software and that there is a legal owner?

Who is the legal owner? I never heard what the final resolution of the probate process was. EDITED to add: Oh, I guess David Schmidt owns all of it now [0]: Symbolics is currently a privately held company which acquired the assets and intellectual property of the old public company called Symbolics, Inc. [0] http://www.symbolics-dks.com/

According to a YouTube comment made 8 months ago by Kalman Reti — the 'last Symbolics developer'— Symbolics IP is owned by John Mallery.

"The problem is that the Symbolics IP is now owned by John Mallery; he has stated he has plans for making it available but so far (several years) has not yet done so. Until he does so, only two groups (that I am aware of) have access through prior contracts with the previous owner of the IP, namely MIT (and anyone officially associated with it) and customers of the Symbolics maintenance business (and independent company) run by David K. Schmidt."

http://www.youtube.com/comment?lc=iMqNHkTp2Oy525xIKnQM_vOmFV...

Re: Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

#73
post #48
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pharo runs on top of something, running on top of something else, ... Genera on the Lisp Machine runs on the metal. It is the process scheduler, it does handle the bus interrupts, it receives the network packets, it writes the bytes to the disk controller, it sets the bits in the graphics card, it writes the sound bytes to audio interface, the network packets are Lisp arrays, ...

Yes, but don't forget the microcode level that runs the Lisp code. Some very small bits of the OS were written in microcode (as few as possible), IIRC. (It's been a long time since I was hanging around the AI Lab. ;-)

The processor instruction set was implemented in Microcode. It was optimized to run compiled Lisp code. There was also a Lisp to Microcode compiler, though I haven't used it.

Re: Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

#74
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A later MacIvory was a third of that.

$23,000 is still a pretty penny.

I have for example this NXP1000, with twice the RAM:

ftp://ftp.ai.sri.com/pub/mailing-lists/slug/930331/msg00117.html

$18,700 in 1992. The last hardware Lisp Machine type.

Many years later I got mine for free from a telco equipment manufacturer.

Re: Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

#75

I've managed today to boot OpenGenera in a Linux VM. It took me a couple of weeks but it finally works. I intend to have a look myself at what the fuss is all about. If you're interested, here are some pointers to relevant resources (snap4.tar.gz image works as advertised): http://www.advogato.org/person/johnw/diary/12.html http://www.cliki.net/VLM_on_Linux http://libarynth.org/vlm_on_linux The opengenera tar-ball ca…

What's the fuss all about? A lot, but please bear in mind the time this was developed. We are now in 2014. We are talking about something about 30 yrs old. A good way to really compare is to go compare with an Apple ][.

Yes - I'm aware about what this is about. From the point of view of a developer, all demos show something that is missing in today's tools.

To compare it to Apple ][ is a bit too stretched. Lisp machines were developer machines. Machines for professionals in computing technology. We don't have that today. For example, what is the equivalent package or distro that transforms your PC in a "developer machine". You don't have anything like that. All you can do is stitch together some emacs/vi/gdb whatever and search some blogs when you're stuck. And beyond that you are not able to go and fix some IDE bugs _live_.

Today we're missing a machine for professional programmer.

Re: Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

#76
post #10
post #4

Sometimes I wonder how much better the computing would be if Lisp Machines had succeeded in the industry and UNIX never left the lab.

I personally think it would have proceeded at a slower pace, and would have been more expensive. The tradeoffs may or may not have been worth it, but there seemed to be an obsession with doing it Right rather than doing it cheap and quick. Even today it would be financially beneficial to buy a $70k workstation over a $2k workstation for a developer if there was a significant boost to productivity; each developer cost…

You may be right but considering today's situation, it really looks like a local maximum. Cheap and fast can get you only that far.

What I wonder is why for 20+ years there was no successful free software project that would mimic the Lisp Machines.

Re: Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

#77

I'd love to play with a Lisp Machine. I live in London, UK, so sadly I can't see any way of using one (either a physical device or a VM). There are pirate copies, but I don't want to go that route. What lisp machine articles often miss is contrast to other related projects. Complete introspectable systems: How does the experience compare with using Pharo Smalltalk today? Sure, it doesn't provide a kernel, but it's a…

> I'd love to play with a Lisp Machine. I live in London, UK, so sadly I can't see any way of using one

Well, you're in luck! Peter Paine of Abstract Science has (as of 2010) a substantial inventory of Symbolics hardware in deepest, darkest Kent: http://www.asl.dsl.pipex.com/symbolics/

From the website: "Location: 50 miles E.S.E. London UK (1/2 hour from continental port Dover and Channel Tunnel train at Ashford). Served by mainline train (65 minutes from central London) and M2 motorway."

Re: Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

#78
post #41

> It was completely programmable with all source code. It was also not for 'playing' around - for that it was too expensive. As a software developer you could focus on your task and the whole operating system was supporting you. There was no piece of software that was not accessible in a few mouse clicks. Everything could be inspected, everything was up for modification. Software was live and dynamic. Not dead and st…

Pharo runs on top of something, running on top of something else, ... Genera on the Lisp Machine runs on the metal. It is the process scheduler, it does handle the bus interrupts, it receives the network packets, it writes the bytes to the disk controller, it sets the bits in the graphics card, it writes the sound bytes to audio interface, the network packets are Lisp arrays, ...

I remember a guy once implemented a Smalltalk machine in an FPGA

http://siliconsqueak.org/ seems to be related.

Re: Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

#79
post #32
post #15

that keyboard, along with the space cadet one, is an aberration. It is too complex for novices, with too many keys. And not optimal to the initiated, as key combinations are much more efficient. anyone with the slightest ergonomic knowledge cringe just by glancing at those things.

Both that keyboard and the space cadet have fewer keys than an IBM PC keyboard.

1. thats a straw man argument. the keypad, etc do not count much.

2. i never said the ibm pc keyboard was any god either :)

Re: Ergonomics of the Symbolics Lisp Machine

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those were nice keyswitches, but the modern Cherry MX is also excellent. I would be hard pressed to pick a favorite between the two of them. The Cherries have a lighter touch and a little "snap", both of which I like.

I'm still going on a vintage Model M. Heavy touch, satisfying clank on each stroke.

model m is overrrated amd loud.

cherry stopped in time.

alps lowered standards to fight off bad income.

...good switches help you feel the key and avoid bottom out. i personally like old complex alps, but everyone will like something different.

Post reply on HN