From: frain@cis.ksu.edu (Jerry Frain)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.unisys,alt.folklore.computers,comp.sys.misc
Subject: Re: Burroughs B20
Date: 15 Nov 92 20:03:03 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: depot.cis.ksu.edu

nite@phoenix.oulu.fi (Hannu Kotipalo) writes:

> Mike Ciaraldi (mcia@uhura.cc.rochester.edu) wrote:
> : In article <cf16naP0Bwx25HbsAe@transarc.com> Pat_Barron@transarc.com writes:
> : >So, I seem to have aquired a Burroughs B20.  Looks like it was meant
> : >to be used as a word processing system.  It's running an operating
> : >system called BTOS.
> : >
> : >What else is there to know about this system?  Can it run any sort of
> : >"real" operating system?  Anyone have any software for it that they no
> : >longer want...?
> : >
> : 
> : The B20 runs BTOS, which was called CTOS when you bought it from Convergent.
> : I think the B20 used a Z80 or similar 8-bit microprocessor.

> No, it uses 8086 or 8088. I'v seen one running an MS-DOS - emulator.

The B20 uses the 8086.

A few years ago, I worked for a local business.  The primary platform
when I began was the Burroughs B2x.  They were used for word
processing, data entry, spreadsheet (Multiplan), dial-up
communications, everything you'd use a normal PC for.  Our B22s had
very good 132-column support, 8" floppy, and 20MB (if I remember
correctly) hard disk.  They were actually pretty nice machines.

> I saw it in our 4H assosiation's local office. I even made a program
> to it with my brother at our high scool time. They used it for word
> processing and financial purposes. And to run our program which
> counted points for little hard-working gardeners (well, the only
> language we got was basic.  Surprisingly it was very near
> GWBasic...)

I did a considerable amount of programming on the B2x.  It did have a
decent BASIC interpreter, if you like that sort of thing -- I don't
(too slow).  That was the only high-level language we had, but there
was a very good editor and production-quality macro assembler on
board.  I used it to do a *lot* of programming that you normally would
not want to do in assembly.  It was almost like programming in a high
level language.

Before I left, I had successfully ported the "Small-C" compiler to the
B20.  I made the equivalent of the crt0 file for passing arguments to
the C program from the executive, and started making the stdio package
for it.  It wasn't real difficult, but the Small-C compiler is
obviously not high-quality.

> My opinion is that the BTOS operating system was much better than
> most of the other character based PC-OS:es at that time. For
> example, to run a program you only needed to give few letters from
> the program name and it searched all matching commands or programs
> starting with those letters. I do not know what was inside the OS,
> but for the user it was more frendlier than for example MS-DOS.

BTOS is better than most PC OS's, as far as I am concerned.  There is
a very well-defined programmer interface to the OS.

The "executive" (command shell) is forms oriented, but it is ok once
you get used to it.  It did have "command completion" as mentioned
above.  I always thought it would have been fun to replace the
executive with a "real" shell (like bash), but that would take quite a
bit of work, especially if you're not familiar with the OS.

BTOS also has a print spooler, with a cool interactive interface for
killing jobs, etc.

If you have any questions about the B20 series, drop me a note.

Jerry Frain
Newsgroups: comp.sys.unisys