Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!sri-unix!Mishkin@YALE.ARPA
From: Mishkin@YALE.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.works
Subject: Re: Unix & Workstations
Message-ID: <15045@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Jan-84 22:51:17 EST
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.15045
Posted: Tue Jan  3 22:51:17 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Jan-84 00:56:38 EST
Lines: 62

From:  Nathaniel Mishkin <Mishkin@YALE.ARPA>

    From: decvax!linus!utzoo!henry @ Ucb-Vax

    Nathaniel Mishkin asks:

            ...despite its problems, Unix appears to be becoming a
            standard.  Why?  I suspect for a number of reasons...

    He then cites conservative designers, possibly-imaginary
    compatibility with other Unix systems, and seemingly-low cost.
    He has missed the three biggest reasons:

        1. It runs on everything.  (Well, nearly.) Why spend man-decades
        building your own new system when a few man-months of effort
        will suffice to port Unix?

I wasn't suggesting that you go out and build a new system.  Rather,
I was suggesting that you shouldn't reject out of hand some already
developed non-Unix system.

        2. We need a standard, even if it only serves as a point of
        departure for future work.  Unix is the obvious candidate,
        with wide enthusiasm and respectable functionality.

Standards are a good thing.  Again, my point was not that you shouldn't
use Unix but rather, that your Unix might be satisfied on a system
that has some sort of Unix emulation in the context of a larger, cleaner
and more interesting and useful system.

        3. (The Big One) It's one of the best things going.  Like
        Algol and Pascal, it's an improvement not only on most of
        its predecessors, but also on most of its so-called successors.
        Of course it has flaws, but it's an appealing mix of simplicity
        and power.  Systems like that are uncommon, and deliberate
        attempts to improve on them seldom capture the same magic
        elegance.

This is exactly the sort of statement that led me to suggest that
people actively attempt to widen their horizons.  Look at some other
systems; read their manuals; be critical; get a demo and use it for
a month; do all this before dismissing a non-Unix system.  If you
think you don't have the time, consider the time that users will lose
if you buy a system that is not the best they could have had.

Anyone who has seen and recalls any of my past submissions to "WorkS"
knows that I am an Apollo fan.  I do not want to hide my biases.  I
can list numerous ways in which the Apollo improves upon Unix in both
user and programmer interfaces without sacrificing elegance and
simplicity (although the Apollo is not Unix and is not in any sense
"based" on Unix, it was clearly influenced by Unix ideas and as such
can be considered an improvement *on* Unix rather than a completely
separate, incomparable system).

It's hard to learn about other systems.  It's hard to look at things
in an unbiased way.  If I listed a few things about the Apollo that
I thought made it better than Unix, I'm sure I wouldn't convince anyone.
Such opinions are formed only after using a system for months.  Consider
it a testimonial -- I've used both Unix and the Apollo (and TOPS-20
and OS/MVS and VM/CMS and RT-11 and who knows what else) extensively
and I'm saying "give the Apollo and other non-Unix systems a very
close look -- they may have something to offer for you".