Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!homxb!mtuxo!mtune!codas!killer!elg From: elg@killer.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Re: Sun vs. 3B2 (was: Ksh availability?) Message-ID: <1957@killer.UUCP> Date: Fri, 30-Oct-87 21:02:57 EST Article-I.D.: killer.1957 Posted: Fri Oct 30 21:02:57 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 1-Nov-87 09:44:34 EST References: <6615@brl-smoke.ARPA> Organization: Bayou Telecommunications Lines: 69 in article <6615@brl-smoke.ARPA>, gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) says: > By the way, WHY are all these architectural discussions taking place > in this newsgroup?? In the beginning, someone asked how they could get ksh. Someone else replied "pay xyz dollars to AT&T and they'll give you the source to it" (where xyz was some huge amount totally out of reach to ordinary citizens). Someone else replied "No, you can buy the binaries for the 3b2 and from third parties". To which I said "Fine if you have a 3b2 or a Vax, the rest of us are just out of luck." And then some obnoxio from AT&T posted "Well buy a 3b2 then! You need one anyhow!" To which I replied that I needed a 3b2 like I needed a hole in my head, and that for the money, I could probably buy a faster machine better suited for my uses (let's face it, I don't have any need for a multiuser widget with glass TTY interface). And then someone brought Sun into it, someone else counterattacked, and here we are. Tracing the history of USENET postings is fun, no? > In article <1903@killer.UUCP> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes: >>well, I'm posting this from an AT&T 3b2 right now. Believe me, compared to >>what kind of stuff is available on a Sun, Sys V.2.2, at least, is so >>plain-vanilla that it's (almost?) painfull. I wouldn't attempt to use Sys V >>without getting either csh or ksh, and a whole bunch of baubles out of the >>net.archives (e.g. the "less" pager, "jove", & sundry other utilities). > > compatible with the 5620's). If "sam" is unavailable, one would use > "jim"; either is quite a bit better than "jove", "vi", and other > similar editors for most purposes. I would also use "pg" (supplied > with the OS) for pagination, or better yet use the scrolling/mouse > editing features of the 630 instead. "pg" is sorry compared to "less". "less" scrolls both forward and backward, and you don't have to always be hitting return (the space bar is under my thumb, fer cryin' out loud, why should I have to reach WAYYY over with my little finger to hit the RETURN key?). I don't know if you've used "jove", but I find it a nice compromise between "vi" (which is a bit simplistic), and full-blown GNU Emacs (which is overkill a lot of the time). I wasn't the person comparing Suns to 3b2s (which is sort of like comparing apples to oranges, as someone else said), but I do think that for the money, for a personal single-user machine, a 3b2 is not the way to go (and I'm not so sure about Sun, either...). I wouldn't know what Sam or Jim are, since I don't happenn to have a $3,000 terminal hanging around, but while their user interface might be prettier, I doubt they could hold their own against GNU Emacs feature-wise. Let's face it, gmacs didn't get to be 1 megabyte of object code fer nuttin'. > The main drawback to the layers protocol, RFS, and so forth is not > technical, since in some ways they are superior to competitive > alternatives, but rather the lateness of their appearance on the > scene From what I've heard of RFS, it needs a bit more work before being useful for the heterogenous networks where NFS is now chugging away. However, considering that NFS is proprietary to Sun, I can see where AT&T needs to develop their own network file system product. But since job control, basic networking etc. is pretty much public domain (since it was done at UCB), I've always wondered why AT&T never adopted any such innovations. Turns out there was a reason. AT&T was busy re-inventing them. Of course. And it took them ONLY 5 years longer than UCB. I don't know about you, but if I saw any other company that took 5 years to bring their product up to the same level as some kludge/hack job done by students at a public unversity, I'd be watching that company go belly-up at this very moment. And some people wonder why Unix's performance in the business market has been so uninspirational... heck, with that track record, is it any wonder why business has been reluctant to buy Unix? -- Eric Green elg@usl.CSNET Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191 {cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg Lafayette, LA 70509 Hello darkness my old friend, I've come to talk with you again....