Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mnetor!frank
From: frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: QNX Operating System
Keywords: operating system
Message-ID: <5000@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: 12 May 89 02:48:38 GMT
References: <634@pmafire.UUCP> <13739@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: frank@mnetor.UUCP (Frank Kolnick)
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 60

In article <13739@watdragon.waterloo.edu> trgauchat@rose.waterloo.edu (Terry Gauchat) writes:
>In article <634@pmafire.UUCP> alan@pmafire.UUCP (alan herbst) writes:
>>
>>Does anyone have any experience with the QNX operating system by Quantum 
>>Software Systems, Kanata, Ontario?  Their ad states QNX is both multiuser
>>and multitasking and only uses 150K RAM and works on PC, AT, PS/2.  It 
>>supports 32 terminals with an AT, 150 tasks per AT, has C compiler, runs 
>>DOS tasks, and costs $450.  Sounds as if it may be good for a small
>>business or home use instead of UNIX or OS/2.
>>-- 
>>Alan Herbst - WINCO Computer Engineering Group
>
>I was working for Noranda Information Services, and wrote an evaluation
>of the QNX Operating System as a part of my duties -- January of this year.
>
>The people at Quantum think that QNX is the best thing since the abacus,
>and are continuously improving it!

[a fair assessment of QNX deleted]

>In conclusion, QNX is a wonderful OS, but is not backed by a big company
>like Microsoft or AT&T, and thus cannot have a major impact in the PC world.
>
>It is definately worth looking into, if you are not seeking DOS networking,
>have real-time or UNIX like applications in mind that don't require UNIX,
>or would like to impress your friends with an OS that can multi-task-user-
>process on a 4.77 XT!
>
>Terry Gauchat.
>MicroCosmic Computer Services.

First, I'll point out that a similar discussion has been going on in 
comp.misc.os for a while. Second, I just published a book on QNX, so I'm
biased (although I do not work for Quantum; just a satisfied customer).
Our consulting comapny has been using QNX for a couple of years, and
it is hands down the best choice for a distributed, real-time system using
PC-type machines (which is pretty much what Terry said). I just want to
clarify a couple of points:
1. while a '386 version of QNX is not (yet) available, QNX does run very
   nicely on 386s (and 286s, both in protected mode)
2. it's true that the shell is frustratingly close to UN*X; a third-party
   Cshell is available
3. I wouldn't write Quantum off quite that quickly. They have over 75,00
   systems installed world-wide, in some very major companies. As soon
   as I mentioned that I was *thinking* of writing a book, I got calls
   from France and Germany requesting copies (for both end-users and
   university courses). In the past week, I've gotten orders from
   Brazil and Switzerland. Quantum itself just finished constructing it's
   own building and is now adding to it! They're holding their second
   annual conference in Ottawa this year. On the technical side,
   I believe they're planning to conform to POSIX and will have a
   'real-time' (small, fast, distributed) windowing system this summer.
   In other words, they're not sitting still and are quite capable of
   taking on the big guys. (IMHO)


-- 
Frank Kolnick,
consulting for, and therefore expressing opinions independent of, Computer X
UUCP: {allegra, linus}!utzoo!mnetor!frank