IBM used to "attack the problem head on and fix it" and a lot of the native technology like PL/I and SOM is based on this philosophy. SOM was designed to be able to combine code written in multiple object oriented languages, even across machines. Now they use outsourced code like Linux and node.js and charge more to run their own software than they do to run that crap.
http://preserve.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.11/11.01/LearningtoLoveSOM/index.html
>The better solution is to attack the problem head on and fix it, which is what researchers at IBM did in producing SOM. I won’t go into the gory details here, but by abstracting the way object instantiation and method dispatch work, they were able to produce an object model that is extremely robust and still efficient and fully object-oriented.
https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/thomas_j_watson
>Follow the path of the unsafe, independent thinker. Expose your ideas to the danger of controversy. Speak your mind and fear less the label of 'crackpot' than the stigma of conformity.
>Every time we've moved ahead in IBM, it was because someone was willing to take a chance, put his head on the block, and try something new.
>Recently, I was asked if I was going to fire an employee who made a mistake that cost the company $600,000. No, I replied, I just spent $600,000 training him. Why would I want somebody to hire his experience?
>Whenever an individual or a business decides that success has been attained, progress stops.
>Once an organization loses its spirit of pioneering and rests on its early work, its progress stops.
This way of thinking is what made IBM successful and brought a lot of innovations in hardware and software, but it's no longer there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workplace_OS
>Written in C
>With protracted development spanning four years and $2 billion (or 0.6% of IBM's revenue for that period), the project suffered from feature creep and the second-system effect. In October 1995, the product was commercially introduced for a few models of IBM PowerPC hardware and the entire project was immediately discontinued.
>Upon cancellation, IBM closed both the Workplace OS project and the Power Personal Division responsible for low-end PowerPC processors.[1] The other long-term effect was that IBM decided to stop developing new operating systems, and committed heavily to using Windows and Linux.
The "Workplace OS" C microkernel was a huge disaster for IBM. It was a disaster because it was based on Mach and written in C instead of using PL/I or Ada and IBM's 40 years (in 1995) of OS design experience. Shitting out junk like AIX and the RS-6000 didn't help their reputation much either.
You left out the worst offender of them all - IBM. The
RS-6000 may crank out 27 MIPS, but it can't context switch
or handle interrupts worth sh*t. You can lower machine
performance to the point of unusability by FTPing a file
from another machine on the same ethernet segment!
Next time get a chance to play with an RS-6000, try
this: Pop about a dozen xterms, iconify them, put the icons
in a row, and wave the pointer back and forth over them as
fast as you can. Astounding, no? The highlighting on the
icons will keep bouncing back and forth long after you stop
waving the pointer. My personal record is 20 seconds.
Makes a Sun-2 running display Postscript seem astoundingly
fast.
RS-6000s also have an annoying tendency to "lock up" for
a few seconds (5 < x < 15) and then return to normal - I'm
told that this is normal and due to paging activity. The
microchannel card cage design is pretty bad too - sure, you
can put cards in, but God help you if you have to take them
back out! And you better tighten down the retaining screws
all the way... or the first time you look at the card funny
it will pop out.
To its credit, I must say it compiles GNU Emacs faster
than any other machine I've used, but I do more with a
workstation than just run compiles. And, if you think
Ultrix is bad, it's only because you haven't tried AIX.