Re: RE: MI emulator

From: Steve Richter <srichter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Don responsed and grand finalized:
> >Just my opinion.  Can you see it? :)
> Yes, I can see!  I can see it!!
> What is below the waterline is classic case of complacency due to little
> real competition. How many IBM as400 managers and system architects have
> lost their jobs due to poor performance?  By locking down the system, not
> open sourcing ILE, the compilers and OS400, mid tier IBM mgmt has been able
> to keep competition to a minimum.

while not disagreeing with the above, there may be other reasons for not
opening up the system:  "security by obscurity". As I (for one) have
repeatedly
demonstrated, the system is insecure because the LQ/STQ instructions are
not privileged instructions, i.e. can be executed by anybody. This makes it
possible for anybody to manufacture a pointer to anywhere in all of the
single-level store. Therefore, to maintain security, it must be nearly
impossible
for others than IBM to write compilers or construct program objects, and
therefore one needs blocked instructions, etc, etc. This deficiency then
ripples up through the whole system, leading to system states, extra
activation groups (so that APIs can run), etc, etc., and none of this can be
open because then the house of cards will come crashing down.