Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!jarthur!usc!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!tank!gargoyle!chinet!les
From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. Unix
Message-ID: <1990Mar16.155157.5431@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 16 Mar 90 15:51:57 GMT
References: <90070.221543GILLA@QUCDN.BITNET> <4473@daffy.cs.wisc.edu> <6508@skinner.nprdc.arpa> <18459@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Reply-To: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Organization: Chinet - Chicago Public Access UNIX
Lines: 24

In article <18459@boulder.Colorado.EDU> wallwey@boulder.Colorado.EDU (WALLWEY DEAN WILLIAM) writes:

>>I would give each of them 1/2 for only handling one of the
>>configurations, and then hand OS/2 a bit more for having LAN Manager
>>more conveniently available.

AT&T is well on the way (if it isn't already out) to having an OS/2
LAN Manager compatible server running under unix - with extensions for
things like spooled printing back to the client PC's which their older
starlan DOS server provided.  Being unix based it will (a) run on
CPU's other than Intel's, and (b) maintain a concept of file ownership
for files stored on the server.  I'm not familiar with LAN manager - 
can you make certain files writable by one user, readable by others?
Will it maintain the attributes if you back the files up and restore them
somewhere else?

>One last thing, rumor has it that Bill Gates is trying to get OS/2
>rewritten in C so that it can be easily transported to new machines.

Gee, I wonder where he got that idea?  Maybe he will add the user
and group id concept as well.

Les Mikesell
  les@chinet.chi.il.us