4 ms·

And yet they've pretty much evaporated since. References to this system are very rare and it seems like only a small circle of people ever truly experienced it.

And yet they've pretty much evaporated since. References to this system are very rare and it seems like only a small circle of people ever truly experienced it. No public copy from what I can see.

dang 11y ago
Here's some more info: http://www.uruk.org/emu/Taos.html http://www.uruk.org/emu/Taos.html, via https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/Cj_67-6g8dA https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/Cj_6.... According to Wikipedia the company was sold in 2007 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao_Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao_Group). That's a pretty long run from the early 90s. I've tried emailing Chris Hinsley to see if he wants to answer questions on HN. An old email address, but maybe he'll see it at some point.
- vezzy-fnord 11y ago
  The uruk.org opinion article was the one I encountered first, though the BYTE mag one is of higher quality. The wiki article lists quite a convoluted history, not to mention all the rebrandings. It seems like they never really focused on attracting researchers or considering any FOSS presence, which is a shame because it's now practically lost by this point. If Hinsley answers, that'd be great.
  - dang 11y ago
    I agree. Heaps of experimentation and first-class work were lost because they happened before open source became mainstream. Especially in industry, where licensing models sealed work off from community adoption.
    - 0xdeadbeefbabe 11y ago
      I'm really starting to wonder if these sealed off models promoted innovation. Have you seen much crazy innovation since open source became mainstream?
      - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
        Open source was basically the default in the beginning, then declined in the 80s and 90s which prompted FSF and GNU to emerge, finally picking back up quickly in the 21st century. This sounds like a massive case of post hoc ergo propter hoc.
        dragonwriter 11y ago
        > Open source was basically the default in the beginning, Prior to the rise of the GPL and other formal F/OSS licensing models, there was some explicitly-dedicated-to-the-public-domain software, and lots of lax enforcement of copyrights in software, and, especially prior to 1974, some doubt about the copyright status of software. Before automatic copyright in 1978, and especially before 1974, lots of software was probably not copyrighted (because it took an active step to do so and because there was doubt about whether doing so would have any legal effect.) But I don't think open source was ever the norm for software once it was clear that copyright protection was available, and certainly not once it became automatic.
  - david-given 11y ago
    I wasn't a founder, but I spent ages campaigning for a free development kit to try and get homebrew momentum. Management was rigidly against it. The reasons basically boiled down to (a) our APIs were trade secrets; (b) support costs would be way too high. (a) was obviously dumb, but (b) had a point. We would have gotten people asking us questions. With a tiny staff we'd have had to blow off anyone who weren't paying for a support contract, which would have gotten us bad press; and given how weird intent was, we would have got questions. Part of the reason for the Amiga deal was that they'd do this for us. Well, that went well...
    - vygr 11y ago
      I agree with Dave, I was involved in arguing for a open version, as the CTO of Tao, so people could get their hands on, but it wasn't to be. :( With hindsight Tao should have done this. Chris
- vygr 11y ago
  I got the email ! Chris Hinsley
  - lsllc 11y ago
    Do you have any more insight onto the state of the Taos IP? (i.e. any chance of getting it open sourced?).
    - vygr 11y ago
      I'm afraid it really is gone :( Rusting on a shelf somewhere never to see the light of day again. However I did start an experimental project a while back to do a simple Taos like kernel over BSD/Linux in x86_64, VP macros and process load balancing, point to point link network simulation and function level dynamic binding ? https://github.com/vygr?tab=repositories https://github.com/vygr?tab=repositories Look for the Asm-Kernel project amongst my other stuff. Was just starting to work on a GUI, AVE MK 6 :) But then got into a new job and it's currently sat at that stage till I go back to it. Regards to all, was great to read this and bring back such wonderful memories of the great team we had at Tao, some of the brightest tech people I have ever had the pleasure to learn from. Chris Hinsley
lsllc 11y ago
I was very interested in this way back when BYTE ran it's article on it. Would love to see it (what's left of it!) open sourced.
keithpeter 11y ago
http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/20622/Taos-Operating-System-Developers-Edition/ http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/20622/Taos-Operating-... A photo of a package for Acorn Archimedes refers to a 'developer edition'. Archimedes computers could host transputers. http://chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/AcornOS.html http://chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/AcornOS.html Right at the bottom - labelled as 'never released' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebe_%28computer%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebe_%28computer%29 Looks like Acorn were considering TAOS OS just before retiring from the general computer business. EDIT: A later development after they went into embedded with some kind of java based runtime http://www.osnews.com/story/157/Tao_Group_on_ElateOS_AmigaDE_and_More http://www.osnews.com/story/157/Tao_Group_on_ElateOS_AmigaDE...

And yet they've pretty much evaporated since. References to this system are very rare and it seems like only a small circle of people ever truly experienced it. No public copy from what I can see.

dang 11y ago

Here's some more info: http://www.uruk.org/emu/Taos.html http://www.uruk.org/emu/Taos.html, via https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/Cj_67-6g8dA https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/Cj_6.... According to Wikipedia the company was sold in 2007 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao_Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao_Group). That's a pretty long run from the early 90s. I've tried emailing Chris Hinsley to see if he wants to answer questions on HN. An old email address, but maybe he'll see it at some point.

vezzy-fnord 11y ago
The uruk.org opinion article was the one I encountered first, though the BYTE mag one is of higher quality. The wiki article lists quite a convoluted history, not to mention all the rebrandings. It seems like they never really focused on attracting researchers or considering any FOSS presence, which is a shame because it's now practically lost by this point. If Hinsley answers, that'd be great.
- dang 11y ago
  I agree. Heaps of experimentation and first-class work were lost because they happened before open source became mainstream. Especially in industry, where licensing models sealed work off from community adoption.
  - 0xdeadbeefbabe 11y ago
    I'm really starting to wonder if these sealed off models promoted innovation. Have you seen much crazy innovation since open source became mainstream?
    - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
      Open source was basically the default in the beginning, then declined in the 80s and 90s which prompted FSF and GNU to emerge, finally picking back up quickly in the 21st century. This sounds like a massive case of post hoc ergo propter hoc.
      - dragonwriter 11y ago
        > Open source was basically the default in the beginning, Prior to the rise of the GPL and other formal F/OSS licensing models, there was some explicitly-dedicated-to-the-public-domain software, and lots of lax enforcement of copyrights in software, and, especially prior to 1974, some doubt about the copyright status of software. Before automatic copyright in 1978, and especially before 1974, lots of software was probably not copyrighted (because it took an active step to do so and because there was doubt about whether doing so would have any legal effect.) But I don't think open source was ever the norm for software once it was clear that copyright protection was available, and certainly not once it became automatic.
- david-given 11y ago
  I wasn't a founder, but I spent ages campaigning for a free development kit to try and get homebrew momentum. Management was rigidly against it. The reasons basically boiled down to (a) our APIs were trade secrets; (b) support costs would be way too high. (a) was obviously dumb, but (b) had a point. We would have gotten people asking us questions. With a tiny staff we'd have had to blow off anyone who weren't paying for a support contract, which would have gotten us bad press; and given how weird intent was, we would have got questions. Part of the reason for the Amiga deal was that they'd do this for us. Well, that went well...
  - vygr 11y ago
    I agree with Dave, I was involved in arguing for a open version, as the CTO of Tao, so people could get their hands on, but it wasn't to be. :( With hindsight Tao should have done this. Chris
vygr 11y ago
I got the email ! Chris Hinsley
- lsllc 11y ago
  Do you have any more insight onto the state of the Taos IP? (i.e. any chance of getting it open sourced?).
  - vygr 11y ago
    I'm afraid it really is gone :( Rusting on a shelf somewhere never to see the light of day again. However I did start an experimental project a while back to do a simple Taos like kernel over BSD/Linux in x86_64, VP macros and process load balancing, point to point link network simulation and function level dynamic binding ? https://github.com/vygr?tab=repositories https://github.com/vygr?tab=repositories Look for the Asm-Kernel project amongst my other stuff. Was just starting to work on a GUI, AVE MK 6 :) But then got into a new job and it's currently sat at that stage till I go back to it. Regards to all, was great to read this and bring back such wonderful memories of the great team we had at Tao, some of the brightest tech people I have ever had the pleasure to learn from. Chris Hinsley

lsllc 11y ago

I was very interested in this way back when BYTE ran it's article on it. Would love to see it (what's left of it!) open sourced.

keithpeter 11y ago

http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/20622/Taos-Operating-System-Developers-Edition/ http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/20622/Taos-Operating-... A photo of a package for Acorn Archimedes refers to a 'developer edition'. Archimedes computers could host transputers. http://chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/AcornOS.html http://chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/AcornOS.html Right at the bottom - labelled as 'never released' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebe_%28computer%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebe_%28computer%29 Looks like Acorn were considering TAOS OS just before retiring from the general computer business. EDIT: A later development after they went into embedded with some kind of java based runtime http://www.osnews.com/story/157/Tao_Group_on_ElateOS_AmigaDE_and_More http://www.osnews.com/story/157/Tao_Group_on_ElateOS_AmigaDE...