Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!spdcc!xylogics!world!madd
From: madd@world.std.com (jim frost)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: ESIX
Message-ID: <1989Nov11.191928.26355@world.std.com>
Date: 11 Nov 89 19:19:28 GMT
References: <2559B869.26977@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca>
Organization: Software Tool & Die
Lines: 32

rho@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Raymond Ho) writes:
>also some reports claim that ESIX is the fastest Unix Sys V available
>for pcs.

No.  Xenix is the fastest in pure CPU usage, Interactive 386/ix wins
out generally because its filesystem is pretty nice.  I've used all
three of them and I liked ISC the best.

>	Do you know anything about this ESIX? They said it is compatible at
>binary level with Xenix and Unix, is it true?

We had some problems getting fullscreen programs to run under ISC and
ESIX although both report Xenix binary compatibility.  Things *did*
run, just not correctly.  This may have been a version problem.  I
never tested it with the newest version of ISC.

If you want to do X11 development, get ISC.  They have the best X11
server available for 386 machines.  Their documentation is pretty
poor, although I just got a report that they are improving it
dramatically for the next release and (FINALLY!) adding online manual
pages.  They are an incredibly responsive company and they'll answer
questions if posted to comp.unix.i386.

If you're looking for a cheap generic 386 UNIX, ESIX comes highly
recommended by people I respect.  I found it usable but not as fast or
well supported as ISC.  It's damn cheap though.

I hope this is helpful.

jim frost
software tool & die     "The World" Public Access Unix for the '90s
madd@std.com            +1 617-739-WRLD  24hrs {3,12,24}00bps