Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!dogie.macc.wisc.edu!uwvax!daffy!cat9.cs.wisc.edu!schaut
From: schaut@cat9.cs.wisc.edu (Rick Schaut)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. Unix
Message-ID: <4473@daffy.cs.wisc.edu>
Date: 15 Mar 90 16:06:11 GMT
References: <90070.221543GILLA@QUCDN.BITNET>
Sender: news@daffy.cs.wisc.edu
Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept
Lines: 23

What about multi-processing (not multi-tasking which both systems can do,
and not multi-user which is the UNIX flavor)?  How do the two systems
compare in a multi-processor environment?

UNIX is exclusively designed to work with losely coupled CPU's (i.e. it's
pretty good for a network) but you can't put it on a system with tightly
coupled CPU's without adding some extensions (ask the people at Cray).

OS/2, on the other hand, has the ability to spin off multiple threads;
exactly the feature one needs to take advantage of a couple of different
CPU's which have access to the same memory.  Also, in conjunction with
the Lan Manager, OS/2 gets the ability to work well with loosely coupled
CPU's as well.

So, in the ability to handle future hardware, score: OS/2 1, UNIX 1/2
In a world of multi-processor workstations and distributed processing
facilities (where multi-user capabilties aren't necessary) it looks as
though OS/2 would be the operating system of choice.

--
Rick (schaut@garfield.cs.wisc.edu)

"I'm a theory geek; we use Turing machines!"--Gary Lewandowski