Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!smsc.sony.com!dce
From: dce@smsc.sony.com (David Elliott)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: UNIX is yuck (was Re: Next intro...)
Message-ID: <1990Oct16.173634.20494@smsc.sony.com>
Date: 16 Oct 90 17:36:34 GMT
References: <58@genco.uucp> <1990Oct11.220943.9764@unislc.uucp>
Sender: dce@smsc.sony.com (David Elliott)
Reply-To: dce@smsc.sony.com (David Elliott)
Organization: Army Recrucification Center
Lines: 30


In article <1990Oct11.220943.9764@unislc.uucp>, dgb@unislc.uucp (Douglas Barrett) writes:
|> If we compare os to os.  UNIX is more complicated.  It takes more hardware

Interesting.  I would have said exactly the opposite.

Unix was designed to be simple.  It has a simple file/peripheral model
(files, tapes, and terminals are all basically byte streams), a simple
process model with simple memory requirements.  The "philosophy" of
Unix is to build up software systems from smaller pieces of software.

The Mac, on the other hand, is complex.  Each program must handle much
more of the "os" type of operations, dealing with a more complicated
filesystem and memory model.  Even the event structure of Mac programs
is more complicated than that of X because of things like floppy disks,
the menu bar, and desk accessories.

Now, from a user's standpoint, the Mac is simpler to use because each
program does more for the user, and Unix is harder to use because there
are so many small "puzzle pieces" to put together.  As a result, Unix
is perceived as being "complicated", where that really isn't the case.

I'll admit that I've simplified things here.  Unix does have some
complexities (ptys and sockets, for example), but even those are
straightforward once you've done it.

...David Elliott
...dce@smsc.sony.com | ...!{uunet,mips}!sonyusa!dce
...(408)944-4073
..."Whoopee!  I'm a human head kabob!" -- Grumpy old man