Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!ists!yunexus!xrtll!silver
From: silver@xrtll.uucp (Hi Ho Silver)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: Where is the long awaited MS DOS 5.0 ?
Summary: let's not have a flame war, people.
Message-ID: <1990Dec29.171755.25340@xrtll.uucp>
Date: 29 Dec 90 17:17:55 GMT
References: <8550@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM> <josef.660901840@ugum01> <GHENNIGA.90Dec13005440@tesla.nmsu.edu> <13523@milton.u.washington.edu>
Reply-To: silver@xrtll.UUCP (Hi Ho Silver)
Organization: Not around here, pal!
Lines: 76


   Before I start, let me say that I _don't_ like DOS and I _do_ like Unix.
But some of the statements in this thread _are_ rather misleading.

In article <13523@milton.u.washington.edu> dittrich@milton.u.washington.edu (Dave Dittrich) writes:
$>2. The ease with which a non-experienced user can learn DOS far
$>outpaces the same user attempting to learn the sometimes cryptic UNIX.
$The ease of learning is not THAT much better (OK, DOS has TENS of commands,
$rather than HUNDREDS, like UNIX.  How many people use all of them though?

   I never thought I'd see myself defending DOS, but let's face it - its
commands are much easier to remember than those under Unix (in general).
DOS tends to use the first few letters of a command, or the whole word if
it's short enough.  Unix tends to pick letters out of the word.  Yes, there
are some cases where this isn't true ... but look at the following.  These
are three of the most commonly-used commands.

FUNCTION		DOS		UNIX
directory/list		dir		ls
copy			copy		cp
erase/remove/delete	erase/del	rm

$And is there a "man" in DOS, hell no!  How about commands telling you
$what flags they accept?  No again.  You just get a "INVALID OPTION" message
$and your C> prompt back.)  Not much easier.

   Quite true, though one of the features that is supposed to (read:  "might")
appear in the long-awaited DOS 5 is that the commands will give you their
syntax if you screw up.

$ rm
usage: rm [-fir] file ...

   Very useful if I want to remove a conifer ... :-)

$>		SCO Xenix 386 -- $469
$>		MSDOS 4.01 ---- $109 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
$Just add the price of the C compiler ($328 in Computer Shopper) and SCO
$looks more attractive ($469 vs. $438). Besides, with SCO Xenix I can

   So we have:

OS with C compiler	$438 [sic]
OS without C compiler	$469

   I think many people would need convincing that it's worth paying an
extra 31 dollars to get rid of the C compiler.  We're comparing apples
and oranges here, folks.  One is a single-user, single-tasking operating
system, designed originally to ease the porting of applications from CP/M;
unfortunately, it hasn't grown up much since they put in some Unix features
in DOS 2.0.  The other is a multi-tasking, multi-user operating system that's
designed for an entirely different set of users.

$Try doing some system programming in UNIX, and you will never go back to VMS
$again.  UNIX makes DOS look like a toy straight-jacket, while VMS looks like
$a stainless steel straight-jacket that makes you ask permission to squirm.

   I like that.  But can we think for a second, rather than starting a
fanatical war?  The majority of the computer users I know are far better
served by a DOS machine than a Unix one.  Most of them run some combination
of 1-2-3, Symphony, WordPerfect, Word, Windows, dBASE, Excel, and other such
programs.  They do no programming and, in fact, are isolated from the system
by a menuing interface.  Yes, it's quite possible to give these people a
Xenix system with word processing, spreadsheet and database applications,
complete with a windowing system to hide the nitty-gritty stuff from them.
But it is not even close to cost-effective.

   Yes, there are applications where a Xenix machine is far more appropriate
than a DOS one.  We also have several clients where a high-powered Xenix
box and a collection of terminals, with a few PCs to suit individual needs,
constitutes the best solution.
-- 
 __            __  _  | ...!nexus.yorku.edu!xrtll!silver |  always
(__  | | |  | |_  |_) >----------------------------------< searching
 __) | |_ \/  |__ | \ | if you don't like my posts, type |    for
_____________________/  find / -print|xargs cat|compress |   SNTF