Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!apollo
From: Giebelhaus@HI-MULTICS.ARPA
Newsgroups: mod.computers.apollo
Subject: RE: Apollo vs. Sun: A short comparison
Message-ID: <851209051830.267370@HI-MULTICS.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 9-Dec-85 00:18:00 EST
Article-I.D.: HI-MULTI.851209051830.267370
Posted: Mon Dec  9 00:18:00 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 12-Dec-85 00:46:55 EST
Sender: bloom@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 20
Approved: apollo@yale-comix.arpa

I have some other problems with Mike Caplinger's comparison.  I was
involved in a comparison of Sun v. Apollo last spring for a research
center and it was rather easy for me to see that the better machine for
the job was the Apollo.

Probably the most important thing to strieghten out is that the Unix on
the Apollo is NOT emulated.  The Unix runs next to Aegis, not on top of
it.  Much of it goes all the way down to the kernel level.  Some of it
like the files system must use the Aegis calls.

The tools on the Apollo are much better (including the C compiler).  The
Aegis operating system is impressively clean and very modular.  It is
the Unix part of the operating system that gives me all the problems.
Apollo cleaned it up some in porting it and it is still much too much of
a hack.  I am impressed with how quickly apollo was able to do the port
(it speaks well of the tools on the Apollo).  Apollo is working on
making the Unix as perfect as possible so they are not done with it yet.

If anyone would like information why we choose Apollo over Sun, I could
send it to you through the e-mail.