Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!internet!Mark Crispin From: Mark Crispin Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Unix bugs vs. VMS bugs Message-ID: <5871@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Sun, 18-Nov-84 02:52:11 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.5871 Posted: Sun Nov 18 02:52:11 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 20-Nov-84 06:42:23 EST Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA Organization: Ballistic Research Lab Lines: 62 This sort of issue comes up whenever people get the impression that there are any absolutes. Just about any system can benefit from having an on-site wizard, even if the operating system is manufacturer-supported (e.g. VMS, TOPS-20, VM/370). While the cost of ownership of a wizard is non-trivial (yes, they do "spend lots of time on the phone, going to conferences, reading nets like this, and hacking"), consider the alternative. You are either stuck with the product as it comes from the manufacturer or you find yourself forced to rent a wizard -- that is, you must hire a consultant. Now I have nothing against consultants! I'm a full-time rental wizard (tr: independent consultant) and I find the business quite lucrative. I hope that attitudes such as Jon Forrest's continue -- customers with that attitude comprise most of my business. The "people problem" with Unix is not the wizards, but rather the groupies. I define a "Unix groupie" as any individual who (1) considers Unix in its present state to be software perfection, (2) refuses to believe that other operating systems have features too, (3) makes noises of disgust whenever some other operating system is mentioned, (4) makes noises of disgust whenever some programming language other than C is mentioned. It's reminiscent of the APL\360 groupies of 15 years ago. Unix does have a software maturity problem. I for one would love to see a standard Unix. It unnerves me when I must relearn "how to do X" just because I'm using somebody else's Unix system. Many of these incompatibilities seem to be completely gratuitous. Also, Unix lacks some very basic facilities which are only now starting to appear: process-to-process memory mapping (for both read and write), process-to-file memory mapping, file interlocks, long file names, user-friendly command interfaces (sh, csh, ksh, etc. are many things, but user-friendly is not one of them), etc. I wish that these things would all appear in all places in the same way, but I fear that in just about every minor version of Unix it'll be completely different. Unix is clearly not for the fainthearted. If you really don't care all that much what the operating system does for you -- e.g. all you want is a FORTRAN engine -- then Unix may not be your answer. You can use a "throwaway" operating system such as VMS. If you actually start USING some special feature of your operating system, you may start caring about what happens when you have to change computer vendors. Finally, I cannot let the comment about "Unix being better than any other operating system (except VMS)" go by unchallenged. I can't see how anybody can possibly make such grand claims about VMS. It's the manufacturer-supplied operating system for a superminicomputer which is now (with the 8600) selling at (high) mainframe prices. It's an upgrade from an earlier minicomputer operating system from that manufacturer, but still some years(!) away from achieving the level of functionality of other operating systems from that manufacturer's other product lines! It's still a dinosaur. Mark Crispin MRC@SU-SCORE.ARPA -------