Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker!ira.uka.de!fauern!tumuc!lan!rommel From: rommel@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de (Kai-Uwe Rommel) Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. Unix Message-ID: <1396@tuminfo1.lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de> Date: 21 Mar 90 17:40:25 GMT References: <90052.182144CMH117@psuvm.psu.edu> <6937@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM> <16155@smunews.UUCP> <25e6d6ed.26a3@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> <25e85897.57ec@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> <21786@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <27788@cup.port <4475@daffy Sender: news@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de Reply-To: rommel@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de (Kai-Uwe Rommel) Organization: Inst. fuer Informatik, TU Muenchen, W. Germany Lines: 33 Please keep this discussion about OS/2 vs. Unix out of this group. When I look at the articles, many of you talking about how pretty Unix is probably never used (or programmed !) an OS/2 system ! NOBODY wants to forbid you using Unix and NOBODY wants to enforce you to use an OS/2 machine ! Well, besides this flame, here is my opinion: I favour OS/2 MUCH over Unix (I work with Unix daily too, I know what I am talking about !) because its much more modern than Unix. It has VERY fast console I/O, all the things I need under Unix are available too. Over Unix it has Dynamic linking (SCO Unix also has some shard libraries it but nobody uses it) and it has threads (try to run several procedures in ONE module, i.e one source text at the same time on the same data under Unix :-). Compare the size of a non-trivial PM application to a "Hello world!" for X11, then you will know what disk space dynamic linking saves! And, most important for me, OS/2 has a well defined and very nice programming interface ! And what about performance ? - I had a chance of testing both SCO Unix and OS/2 1.1 on the same machine (386, 24 MHz, 8 MB RAM, 80 MB disk). Although X11 runs very well on this machine, it is MUCH slower than the OS/2 PM and even slower than MS-Windows on DOS. The file system was a "AT&T fast file system" (am I right ?) which was even slower than a FAT file system on doing an "rm -r" on a big tree. Also SCO Unix hogs the whole 80 MB disk for system files and programs - where OS/2 for the same functionality (with C compiler, lots of tools, libraries and so on) occupies about 20-25 MB ! Kai Uwe Rommel Munich rommel@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de