Xref: utzoo comp.os.minix:7631 comp.sys.ibm.pc:36719 comp.unix.xenix:8156
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker!mit-eddie!attctc!chasm
From: chasm@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Charles Marslett)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: dosread.c again
Summary: WHAT?!?!?!?!?!
Message-ID: <9830@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>
Date: 23 Oct 89 03:49:05 GMT
References: <3717@ast.cs.vu.nl> <3a18.2536ede8@ibmpcug.co.uk> <3721@ast.cs.vu.nl> <6627@ficc.uu.net>
Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Organization: The Unix(R) Connection, Dallas, Texas
Lines: 53

In article <6627@ficc.uu.net>, peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
> [wrt Mac vs. DOS] The system software is pretty psychotic, but it's a hell of a lot
> better than DOS.

I don't know what you are refering to here, but having used MANY operating
systems, and programmed them, the Mac OS (Finder, et al.) is only marginally
better than DOS.  In fact I find DOS+MS/Windows to be not only comparable, but
more flexible (it does have a command line interpreter), and more intuitive.
So what if it came along two or three years later -- it is an improvement.

If you are referring to programming, the Mac is the only machine I have
surrendered to (I have never successfully written a program from scratch
for it.  They all get bogged down in trying to do some trivial little thing
that both DOS and Unix do make easy).

> No, it's not. The DOS system calls are a proper subset of the UNIX system
> calls. The names and calling arguments are, in most cases, the same within
> two decimal places. Just about everyone (Microsoft included) has discovered
> the UNIX programming model by now.

Except Apple.

> No, it's an apples-and-apples comparison. There are plenty of low-cost
> alternatives to DOS, even on 8088-based machines.

WHAT??????????????????

Be real,

If you can mention a single real alternative to DOS on an 80x86 machine
that qualifies (even being rather liberal and ignoring the cost of application
programs) as low cost, I'll shut up and go along with this (%censored%).

Minix is hardly useful as a programming environment (for example, it is not
even on my hard disk now, Xenix has displaced it, but DOS is always there,
because I cannot work without it -- My MINIX kernel is, of course, compiled
under DOS).  DRDOS has most of the drawbacks of MSDOS, and a few extra.
Xenix costs more than the machine I run it on (and more than all but two
or three of the programs on the disk put togather).  Interactive Unix is
even more (and runs only on a 386).  VM/386 is likewise nice, but not cheap
and not supported universally among software vendors ;^).  And I cannot
waste the netwidth for a complete list, so I'll just ask:  what is a
worthwhile alternative??

> -- 
> Peter da Silva, *NIX support guy @ Ferranti International Controls Corporation.
> Biz: peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. Fun: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com. `-_-'
> "ERROR:  trust not in UUCP routing tables"                                 'U`
> 	-- MAILER-DAEMON@mcsun.EU.net

Charles Marslett
chasm@attctc.dallas.tx.us
[Speaking purely personally, since I have lots of personality to speak from.]