Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!uwvax!oddjob!hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!cadovax!keithd From: keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: UNIX from HELL Message-ID: <1439@cadovax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 16-Mar-87 17:14:14 EST Article-I.D.: cadovax.1439 Posted: Mon Mar 16 17:14:14 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 18-Mar-87 06:03:17 EST Reply-To: keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) Organization: Contel Business Systems, Torrance, CA Lines: 125 References: >>An Amiga-as-a-UNIX-box will never sell. SUN already does that. Apple will >>be there soon. >I disagree. A UNIX (tm) system at Amiga 1000 prices would sell like hotcakes >to universities, a huge market, and to all outside the university systems who >have had the chance to fall in love with the power and flexibiity of UNIX. You first have to produce a version of UNIX that would run in a 512k system with two floppy drives that would not be a total DOG. In my experience with Xenix on an AT, I found that with a 20mb hard disk and 640k, I was left with less than 10MB on my hard disk, and performance in 640k was intolerably slow. Only when I added an above-board RAM card could I even stand to use it. In 640k, just the loading of a medium size application took so long, the system probably swapping and re-swapping pages out of memory like crazy as it read the application into memory. I would think we can make a few statments about UNIX: 1) Requires HARD DISK of at least 15Mb. 2) Can run, but you won't want to use it with less than 1Mb RAM. In addition, you have to add to that AT&T license fees, though I suppose one might predict they will go down in time. So I would think, with this logic it wouldn't be too hard to make a statement something like: "For the next year or so, the CHEAPEST one could possibly sell a UNIX box that anyone would want to use would be somewhere in the range $xxxx-$yyyy" My guess is we're still talking $3000-$4000. I could be proven wrong, I'm sure, and I suppose one day this will change as everything gets cheaper. HOWEVER, it is certainly POSSIBLE to configure an Amiga with enough hardware to support UNIX. All you have to do is convince someone that it's worth spending money to do the port. Then you get what you want without penalizing the rest of us. I just can't see how it makes sense to provide UNIX on an Amiga as the plain vanilla OS that you get with every system. For one thing, not EVERYBODY wants or likes UNIX. I'd hate to pay the performance penalty, or the license fees myself. It works fine on the company VAX, and I do like the interface and features, but with Matt's shell, I can't tell the difference anyway. >Commodore had no choice but to do a quick and dirty OS release at the time, >they came very near bankruptcy, and really needed the cash flow the Amiga 1000 >has provided. The attempt to make a UNIX-like OS was 100% behind schedule, >and AmigaDOS got the product out the door and gave Commodore some breathing >room. Granted. Life in the big city. >However, AmigaDOS is the biggest sales weakness of an otherwise excellent >product, and now is the time for it to be either drastically upgraded, or >preferably replaced with an independently engineered UNIX clone. Not so much >for the end user, but simply because 3rd party software development in a >mixed BCPL and C/UNIX-clone environment is so much harder than a pure C/UNIX >environment that product releases have been slow. As Apple proved long ago >with the contrast in initial acceptance of the Apple II and the Macintosh, >it is third party hardware and software that makes or breaks a home computer >product, so anything Commodore can do to ease third party development is just >money in the bank for Commodore. Well, I pretty much agree with you here. Some people have been complaining about Pournelle's comments in the letters section of the latest BYTE about how "the Amiga is harder to port to than the Atari". Though I'm not to crazy about Pournelle's 'diplomacy' shall we say in the way he makes such a statement, he is basically right. And it's not because the Amiga is a multi-tasking machine, as UNIX and other systems are not as 'hard' as the Amiga to port to. It's the lack of resource managment/tracking, and memory management type features (whether provided in hardware or software). EVERY program has to be careful to clean up after itself. A UNIX program, while multi-tasking like the Amiga, dosen't have to do anything except exit(0); without fear his next task will be compromised because something was left un-done. A program on a single tasking machine such as the Atari just has to do a warm boot. But I don't know what the best path from here to success is, obviously either the addition of a MMU or perhaps a switch to 68010 and lotsa new software are among the choices. I suppose DO NOTHING is a choice too, but here's hoping they don't pick that one. Rumor has it that the original Amiga-destined OS is still out there and may get a shot at it. >Amen. As a Commodore stockholder, I weakly applaud the Amiga 2000's IBM >compatibility features (just because there are a lot of people out there in >business land unsophisticated or conservative enough to think a computer has to >be an IBM clone to work at all, and they make buying decisions), although it >was silly to aim at the PC level performance, which is pretty out of date in >today's business community, where the XT is considered a minimum, and the AT >a preferable level of performance, for today's office. Well, I'm still kind of wondering: "what's the point". I mean, you can buy both an Amiga 1000 AND a PC clone for less than the cost of an A2000 with associated PC expansion hardware. And for now, you only get simple file transfer, which you can get with a cable and couple of public domain terminal programs. Commodore has made some hint of some features that will closer tie the two machines together, but I for one 1) am not going to hold my breath and 2) can't really imagine much they could do together that would make it a better option over any other co-processor which I kinda see as a bit of a frivolity anyway. The A2000 LOOKS more like a business machine, with it's slots, and I certainly think using the AT bus is a good idea, despite the fact that Commodore has effectively told all of the garage hardware shops "hey guys, you now have the entire PC marketplace as competition, hope you didn't decide on the Amiga cause it would give you a chance to be the only game in town for a while". But as far as I'm concerned, if you want a PC, BUY a PC. If you want an Amiga, BUY an Amiga. If you want BOTH, BUY BOTH. The only point I can see, is that it MAY give an excuse for certain ComputerLands, Nynex, and other such stores to have an Amiga there in the store next to the PCs and Macs. Then again it may not. Everybody knows the PC marketplace is flooded. It's tougher to compete there than just about anywhere else. What apparently keeps companies trying to edge in there, is the fact that it is the single largest micro marketplace (which spells G-R-E-E-D). The ONLY things that can save a company still trying to make it there are 1) totally cuthroat pricing, or 2) product differentiation. Certainly Amiga has #2, but the step of coming out with the A2000 does nothing new really to ADVANCE the Amiga along those lines. I guess we'll just have to wait for the A3000 and see. Keith Doyle # {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd # cadovax!keithd@ucla-locus.arpa