Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!bsu-cs!corwin From: corwin@bsu-cs.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions Subject: Re: dsb unix vs. dec's vms Message-ID: <688@bsu-cs.UUCP> Date: Fri, 22-May-87 02:16:53 EDT Article-I.D.: bsu-cs.688 Posted: Fri May 22 02:16:53 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 23-May-87 10:38:21 EDT References: <5828@shemp.UCLA.EDU> <34ab0e42.8be4@apollo.uucp> <3583@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> Organization: CS Dept, Ball St U, Muncie, Indiana Lines: 65 Summary: Comparison is erroneous... In article <3583@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>, steven@pearl.berkeley.edu (Stephen the Greatest) writes: > In article <34ab0e42.8be4@apollo.uucp> jps@apollo.uucp (Jeffrey P. Snover) writes: > > > >>I know that bsd unix outperforms vms; I also know by > >>experience that vms interfaces (to programs and other > >>users) are quite bad. > > > > > >VMS interfaces "are quite bad" ? REALLY! I have worked > >with both UNIX and VMS for many years and whereas VMS > >does have its weakness, I don't think that any sentine > > > pretor) in VMS. Why can't anybody in DEC write something like C-Shell? > I think VMS is absolutely able to support a C-Shell-like command interface. > Also, the primary language for VMS (as least I think) is FORTRAN while UNIX > is C. This does tells us something about the strengths of each operating > systems. Personally, I like BSD UNIX better. > > - Stephen Chung I just finished an extensive paper on system management philsophy, and it basically compares and contrasts Unix with VMS in about as thorough a study as I could manager without writing a book. In my paper I show how each system was designed with very different goals in mind, and that those goals molded and shaped the respective OS's right down to the internals. I go on to show how there can be no real comparison of the two, since they are aimed at such different target markets and to some extent have such different features. The continual Unix vs. VMS battle (which is the subtitle for my paper) seems to be a bit foolish. The key words tt are used seem to be 'I like', and so it appears that a lot of what is being passed for objective data is in fact subjective opinion. For instance: DEC does market DEC/Shell for VMS, so it is an established fact that a Unix-like environment can be run on top of VMS. Another question is what is being criticized. If you are criticizing DCL say so; it is one thing to criticise the command language interpreter and another to belittle the operating system internals. VMS is a far more reliable system than Unix, and I am sure most Unix gurus sufficiently familiar with VMS will acknowledge this. On the other hand, both systems seem to be about equal in terms of security. Anyways, this is all in my paper, which will hopefully be published somewhere soon... My point is that trying to 'prove' that one OS is 'better' than another is engaging in a battle of wits with water pistols unless you set up strict criteria of comparison. I would enjoy seeing a real discussion of VMS vs. Unix get going here, replete with "But the VMS manual says X" and then "Ah, but in the Unix manual Dennis says..." and so on. The tossing about of unsubstantiated comments is neither productive nor fair to either operating system. Once you acknowledge that the design goals in each case were different, it begins to come clear that there can never really be a comparison of the two operating systems for that reason... Sorry somewhat acerbic. Hectic finals week for me. Apologies for any toes stepped on, etc... -- Paul "Corwin" Frommeyer "Experience is no substitute for competence." UUCP: {seismo,ihnp4}!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!corwin