Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!nstar!larry From: larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386 Subject: Re: wanted: UNIX or clone Message-ID: <1991Apr27.225054.21158@nstar.rn.com> Date: 27 Apr 91 22:50:54 GMT References: <9104182040.41@rmkhome.UUCP> <1991Apr21.222710.410@unixland.uucp> <1991Apr25.143615.12473@nstar.rn.com> <1991Apr25.231055.9621@unixland.uucp> Organization: NSTAR, Indiana's LARGEST BBS 219-289-0287/317-251-7391 Lines: 43 bill@unixland.uucp (Bill Heiser) writes: >>ISC and their FFS is so much faster than ESIX - and so many off the >>shelf UNIX applications are available for ISC (Word Perfect and Norton >>for example).. >I've seen this said over and over again by Larry (the FFS issue). I haven't >seen the same from anyone else. Say, anyone else out there have this >experience? The ESIX FFS may well be slower than ISC's -- but it doesn't >"feel" any different to me than the other Unix systems I work on (Harris >Sysv with FFS, SunOS in various flavors). it's just very fast - period. Nothing (that I have played with) for 386 based machines comes close.. ok, then on the second issue above, you mentioned in a previous article that ISC VP/ix didn't work under ESIX with some applications - which brings up my second issue that you quoted. Those who buy ESIX and purchase a package that doesn't offically support ESIX - are "on your own" >I guess there's probably more to the issue than "how it feels." >As far as apps go ... the original conversation was about HOME Unix systems. >Maybe I'm mistaken, but I doubt that the majority of people can spend >$500 to $1K on a single software package (other than the OS itself). >When I got WP5.1 for my DOS machine, I paid something like $220 for it. >That's the price range most people expect for software for home machines. WP for UNIX is (I believe) the same price as for DOS (single user that is). >That being said, I agree that ISC has the name advantage over ESIX. >If we're in the business of talking about NAMES, though, SCO has the >unmitigated lead. SCO has the lead if you consider their XENIX licenses - -- Larry Snyder, NSTAR Public Access Unix 219-289-0287/317-251-7391 HST/PEP/V.32/v.32bis/v.42bis regional UUCP mapping coordinator {larry@nstar.rn.com, ..!uunet!nstar.rn.com!larry}