Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!hsdndev!bu.edu!polygen!jerry
From: jerry@polygen.uucp (Jerry Shekhel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 versus UNIX
Message-ID: <1101@stewart.UUCP>
Date: 20 May 91 15:35:28 GMT
References: <1075@stewart.UUCP> <3330.tnews@templar.actrix.gen.nz> <1089@stewart.UUCP> <1991May15.110459.21996@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Reply-To: jerry@stewart.UUCP (Jerry Shekhel)
Organization: Polygen Corporation, Waltham, MA
Lines: 68

peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>
>Well, to begin with, the "concept of the foreground process" is a major step
>back from UNIX's dynamic priority reallocation, which automatically gives more
>CPU time to *all* interactive processes... not just the one that happens to
>have an active window.
>

This is debatable.  NeXT-OS seems to have special treatment for the
foreground process as well.

>
>As for threads, I've written a set of fairly portable
>threads routines and posted them a couple of years back. If you want kernel
>threads, there are variants of UNIX that do that.
>

"Portable threads routines?"  This is interesting.  How can you graft thread
on top of a UNIX kernel that doesn't support them?  All you have in normal
UNIX is fork(), which creates both a process and an execution thread.  There
simply is no way to create just the thread!  Seriously, I'd like to see how
you did this!

>
>Basically, everything OS/2 does is already available in some version of UNIX,
>

Yes, this is probably true, but you must admit that UNIX is a horrible mess,
with all the different versions floating around, each with its own set of
deficiencies.

>
>and the only reason IBM
>and Microsoft went for a new O/S instead of tuning a UNIX variant to their
>tastes is marketing hype to keep users locked in to proprietary systems.
>

Sorry, you're wrong.  The reason they went for a new OS has to do with the
hardware for which it was initially written -- the Intel 286.  UNIX does not
run well on that processor.

>
>I don't like DOS. I despise the very idea of OS/2.
>

Well, you may dream of a world standardized on UNIX, but I prefer having
several choices.

>
>More IPC mechanisms? That's supposed to be good? How about AmigaOS, which has
>one very good IPC mechanism?
>

Wait a minute!  I thought you despised the very idea of proprietary operating
systems!  Read your own comments above.

>
>Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
>
--
+-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+
| JERRY J. SHEKHEL  | POLYGEN CORPORATION  | When I was young, I had to walk |
| Drummers do it... | Waltham, MA USA      | to school and back every day -- |
|    ... In rhythm! | (617) 890-2175       | 20 miles, uphill both ways.     |
+-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+
|           ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry             |
|                            jerry@polygen.com                               |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+