Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!ut-sally!utah-cs!utah-gr!uplherc!sp7040!obie!wsccs!terry
From: terry@wsccs.UUCP (terry)
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: Unix vs VMS
Message-ID: <365@wsccs.UUCP>
Date: 23 Mar 88 08:43:03 GMT
References: <1060@sask.UUCP>
Lines: 198
Keywords: Unix, VMS
Summary: Correction

Kevin, before I start, let me point out that you are mostly addressing user
interface issues, not OS issues.  While it is true that there is not "as much"
software available under UNIX that operates exactly the way software operates
on a DEC 2060, you certain can't expect that to be the case.

I will deal with some of your topics, as far as I see them to be a comparison
of operating systems, and not user interface decisions.  This will include
software availability.

I will also criticize user interface issues which I feel to be baseless, so
as to make this posting more interesting to read :-).

In article <1060@sask.UUCP>, lowey@sask.UUCP (Kevin Lowey) writes:
> It has been argued that Unix has more cheap documentation available.  My 
> reply to that is the casual user of unix needs more than documentation.

	I think the the amount of documentation which has been professionally
written for/about UNIX is based not on "need for documentation", but the fact
that there are more UNIX systems out there.  VMS, unfortunately, is proprietary
(and is being intentionally kept that way) to a single architecture.  I am sure
that if there were more machines running VMS, or if a supported version ran on
the IBM AT (_supported_; not Wendyn's OS toolkit!), there would be a lot more
documentation available for VMS.

> How many profs do you know who read manuals :-).

	All of them who wish me to believe they know what they're talking
about.  A computer science professor who is unwilling to crack a manual is
about as useful as a psycologist running a computing services department.

> All I know is "DIRECTORY" makes a lot more sense to new users than "ls"
> (not "LS", thats different).

	That is primarily your background showing through.  A user whose first
experience with an office computer is SCO Xenix will find "DIRECTORY" quaint,
verbose, and hard to remember.  Having first encountered a built-in directory
command on a VOS system, "MAP" seems quite natural to me :-(.

>  Sure, you can get windowed shells etc, but what's the overhead for that?

	Less than the overhead for CLD's, if you are talking processing time
and memory required.  Contact HCR of Canada.  What does a "windowed shell"
have to do with command line command names?  A have seen a number of excellent
"menu-driven-DCL" programs; does their overhead endear me to the Bourne Shell?
I think not.  A horde of talk.bizzarre probably couldn't endear me to the
Bourne Shell :-).

>   Now lets look at networking.  Unix runs on a lot of machines.  Fine, so
> does VMS.

	Modern networking was invented on UNIX machines at UCB... IBM's
stuff does not count as modern.

	As to the variety of machines VMS runs on vs. the variety of machines
UNIX runs on, you seem to have limited your sample to DEC architectures...

> It might not be as many as UNIX, but in the real business world, more VMS
> machines are there than UNIX machines.  Don't be put off by the word
> "Business".

	I think you are mistaken here.  Please compare the number of UNIX
systems running on Intel processor based machines alone with the number of
VMS systems out there.  If you want the horrible truth, in the "real business
world", there are more MS-DOS systems than either.  That does not mean that
it is desirable to indoctrinate students into the idosyncracies of DOS if there
is a good VMS or UNIX system available.  Unfortunately, DOS is in wise use, and
so must be dealt with in any comprehensive program with the intent of bringing
students out with a capability to deal with "what's out there".  It seems that
a firm grounding in "how to run a MAC" is needed these days, as well, sigh.

> A lot of the applications used in Business (Statistics, Presentation
> Graphics, database, word processing) also apply to academics.

As of the last issue of a number of trade journals, SPSS runs on many UNIX
systems, and there are versions for PC's.  Presentation graphics is owned by
Apple, with Commodore Edging up fast and Atari a close third.  Informix, a
primarily UNIX product, by volume, is probably the best-selling database out
there, with the possible exception of dBase, a PC product, and a number of
it clones, which run on UNIX systems.  Hypercard for the MAC is making fast
inroads, but probably will not really "get in there" until 2 or 3 more
revisions.  Word Perfect, far and away the world leader, with 40% of *ALL*
word processing programs having been sold by them, runs under DOS, UNIX,
Xenix, TOS (Atari), AmigaDOS (Commodore), AND VMS.

Now it would be truly silly if "academics" had no basis in what people were
getting paid (so they could feed their faces) to do, wouldn't it?

> A lot of companies develop their software for IBM and VMS.  Unix seems left
> out somehow.

On the contrary, most software houses I know of (and Utah's Wasatch front is
_THE_ silicon valley of software) write first for DOS, then UNIX, then other
machines.  DEC has exactly the same number of people in their VMS and ULTRIX
developement groups (although they have *many* programmers developing the
"layered" software for VMS only).  In addition, since finding themselves
unable to convince GSA to not insist on SVID for the AFCAC, DEC has announced
plans to develope their own SVID compatable operating system... a UNIX SysV.

>   All our VAXes (administrative and academic) are connected via DECnet.

DECnet runs on Ultrix, DOS, and many UNIX machines, including SUN microsystems.

> I can copy files easily, using the regular VMS copy command, between all these
> machines.  All I have to do is add the machine name in front, and supply
> a username and a password.

If you have correctly set up your proxy file, you needn't do even that.  The
same is true, however, of systems running NFS, or _ANY_ machine running the
Wollongong products for standard TCP/IP.  Intel's OpenNET is currently being
tested for many systems... From DOS to Xenix to VMS.

> In addition, I have a microcomputer on my desk which is connected via
> Ethernet to TWO VAX 8650 computers, and TWO laser printers, one an LN03+
> and the other a Postscript printer.  My total PC online storage is over
> 100MB.  This all can be accessed either as MS-DOS files from
> my microcomputer, or from the VAX as VMS files.

This is true of many operating systems.  You don't get out much, do you?

>   If I want to do data analysis, I can use Lotus 1-2-3 to enter my data on 
> the micro, and save the data as an ASCII file.  I can then log into the vax,
> and the file is already there.  No messing with Kermit, etc.  I can then
> run SAS or whatever to produce my results, edit those results into my 
> WordPerfect on the microcomputer (again without transferring files), and 
> print this on a laser printer which could be shared with everyone else on
> campus if we wished.  Unix may have these capabilities, but I don't think 
> they are as seamless as DECNET.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Among other products, they ARE DECnet.  In addition, Lotus Clones such as
VIP Professional or SCO Professional run on enough machines that the number
of machines available to run them on exceeds the number of PC's out there.
In addition, introduction of products such as DOSmerge and VP/IX have your
DOS programs running as tasks UNDER UNIX.  This of course can be done on
other systems (evidence: the software emulators for the Amiga and ST), but
as far as I know, you have to buy extra hardware for a VAX, weather or not
it runs UNIX or VMS or RSTS. Correct ME if I'm wrong.

>   As for wide area networks, we are connected to BITNET.  We can use the
> JNET software to send files "/VMSDUMP" to other VMS BITNET sites.  This
> means the files are transfered as binary files, WITH ALL THE FILE 
> ATTRIBUTES INTACT.  Doing this is almost as easy as using the COPY command.
> (By the way, BITNET is funded by IBM, not DEC).  Bitnet also has gateways
> available to most other networks, such as ARPA, UUCP, EDUNET, and others.
> File transfer to these networks has to be done with uuencoded mail files,
> but we can't have everything :-)

The additional networks you mention are (can't say UNIX networks) running on
hardware under UNIX.  If you wish to maintain attributes, BACKUP the files
before uuencoding them.  One bad thing about the VMS file system is that it
does not lend itself to easy transfer via asynchronus methods.

>   So lets look at what we got by going to VMS instead of UNIX.  3 years ago
> before the change, we had three seperate operating systems.  TOPS-20, VMS,
> and UNIX.  Now we have two, UNIX and VMS.  The scientific research facilites,
> such as the linear accelerator, and the Computer Science department use
> UNIX because their users are all well versed in computers, and UNIX has
> all the required tools for their applications.  
>          
>   For the casual statistics or word processing user however, the VMS machines
> are used.  The reasons are VMS applications are more suitable to their needs,
> and the VMS utilities are easier to use (tell me VMS mail isn't nicer than
> UNIX mail, or that VMS command line editing isn't better than Unix History)

	You're quite right that the DEFAULT utilities do not measure up to
VMS standards.  To say they were "better" would be to drag myself into a
large debate on user interface preferences.

> This degree of integration between administrative and academic applications
> is not as easy using Unix (as far as I know).

Please read above.

>   As for business uses.  VMS is again superior to UNIX, not for any 
> technical reasons, but because VMS and IBM are what the vendors are writing
> software for.  

I write software for UNIX and VMS and BTOS and DOS and... :-).

>   If you buy IBM, you are definitely locked into one vendor.  VAX/VMS is 
> one vendor as well, but not as much as IBM.  You can hook non-DEC devices
> to DEC computers a lot easier than to IBM, and the transfer of information
> among different sites is much easier if you don't have to worry about 
> EBCDIC to ASCII translations.  To get the degree if integration obtained
> in VMS, some hardware dependance is to be expected (ANSI terminals for
> instance, again another standard).  As for the costs, I agree they are high,
> but often University prices are more reasonable.  

DEC harware plug-campatables "plug-in" regardless of the OS!  I use an ANSI
terminal to VMS and UNIX systems on a daily basis.

I really would be more interested in someone with source liscences comparing
and contrasting paging algorythms.  Then we could move this discussion to
one of the .os. groups.  Currently, it seems, it needs to be moved to
user.interface.bashing.

				My 8 cents worth

				terry@wsccs