Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site denelcor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!hao!denelcor!lmc
From: lmc@denelcor.UUCP (Lyle McElhaney)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: 4.2 progressive or dead end
Message-ID: <389@denelcor.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Apr-84 14:25:34 EST
Article-I.D.: denelcor.389
Posted: Thu Apr 12 14:25:34 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Apr-84 21:10:40 EST
References: <127@down.UUCP>
Organization: Denelcor, Aurora, CO
Lines: 55

Ah, here we go. The great Fickle.

It's amazing. When Mike O'Dell got up at the USENIX meeting in Toronto and
announced that 4.2 was ready to ship, he got an ovation. Why? Because
at that time it was recognized that the then current 4.1bsd was *the*
best available UNIX operating system available for the VAX. Sure, there
were some who doubted that, who didn't like the -v option on cat, who
abhor screen editors on principle (I would still like to know which
principle), and who didn't appreciate DoD attempting to standardize
*their* software (and hire a grad school to do it).  Western Electric was
deaf as a post when it came to support; Berkeley wasn't much better, but
then with 4.1 it didn't need to be. The ut systems comparisons done by
Quarterman et al. tell the story. Note also the reception that the Bell
system spokesmen normally receive with their announcements at USENIX.

Well, now it happens that AT&T can begin to make *big* money in Information
Systems ($40K would pay off my mortgage, with some left over, but its
peanuts to them), so they begin working their products in earnest. Good.
I see no reason now why System 8 wouldn't stomp all over 4.2bsd. Compare the
efforts. Compare the respective development groups' salaries. Compare the
head start and the available resources. No reason at all that it could
not be everyone's everything.  Providing we can get it.  Providing it will
still support the VAX (if that's a joke, please consider the poor 11/70).
And when we do get it, remember the marketing ploys that are attached - ATT
has up till this point simply been experimenting with binary-only offerings
and pricing which leaves out educational budget considerations. Ah, and
Berkeley won't be there any more with its $400 alternative.

(Don't think that I believe that ATT is being unfair - just being business-
men. That's the way it goes. Just contemplate what it has done to the Korn
shell, the termlib package, and the Blit.)

But why all the ravings about 4.2? Yes, there have been problems; yet my list
of problems is miniscule beside that of most other proprietary operating
systems. There are design flaws; but there are also ways around them, and
they represent perhaps better ways of doing things in the long run. How
many people have bought 4.2, but aren't using it?  Well, I saw three
notices this week about systems going to be unavailable for the switchover
to 4.2.  Most of my USENET neighbors are running it.  How many run USG
systems on VAXen?  Is it simply for the networking? (Can *simply* be used
in that context?) Is it all just to be trendy?

That's a good question. Check back in a year, and lets see then how many
are still running 4.2. Meanwhile, lets talk about the problems, and stop
the shouting and the rhetoric. Its sounding like an old-time IBM vs.
(name your favorite) mud-slinging here.

Flame the flames!

Oh, and take it easy on the grad students. You may have to be one someday.
Just because its slave labor doesn't mean that its bad. And reference
the debate in net.sf-lovers concerning using hacker perjoratively.
-- 
		Lyle McElhaney
		(hao,brl-bmd,nbires,csu-cs,scgvaxd)!denelcor!lmc