Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:11084 comp.os.vms:11104
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-ncis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!agate!bionet!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!uxc!deimos!ksuvax1!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!sloane
From: sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Bob Sloane)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: Do OS's slow down with age?  (was: DDJ article / UNIX vs BS/2)
Message-ID: <2880@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
Date: 13 Jan 89 10:04:34 GMT
References: <209@imspw6.UUCP> <12872@steinmetz.ge.com> <370@siswat.UUCP> <1472@cps3xx.UUCP> <12938@steinmetz.ge.com> <2862@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <9360@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services
Lines: 17

In article <9360@smoke.BRL.MIL>, gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn ) writes:

> "Portability" is relative, not absolute.  UNIX (or, according to some
> Bell Labs staff, "Unix"; definitely not "unix") can be and has many
> times been ported to new, considerably different environments with far
> less work than a total reimplementation would have called for.  That
> has not been demonstrated for VMS, for reasons that are obvious to most.

I guess I should put more smiley faces in the stuff I post.  I was just trying
to point out that there are about a zillion different "uNiX's" and, as far as
I can tell, all of them are incompatible with all of the others in some way or
other.  I really don't want to start another OS war.
+-------------------+-------------------------------------+------------------+
|  Bob Sloane        \Internet: SLOANE@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU/Anything I said is |
|  Computer Center    \ BITNET: SLOANE@UKANVAX.BITNET   / my opinion, not my |
|  University of Kansas\  AT&T: (913) 864-0444         /  employer's.        |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+----------------------+