Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!ucsd!ogicse!blake!djo7613
From: djo7613@blake.acs.washington.edu (Dick O'Connor)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. Unix
Keywords: Invitation for opinions/flames...
Message-ID: <5096@blake.acs.washington.edu>
Date: 19 Dec 89 16:30:39 GMT
References: <260@ndla.UUCP> <487@lectroid.sw.stratus.com>
Reply-To: djo7613@blake.acs.washington.edu (Dick O'Connor)
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Lines: 22

In article <487@lectroid.sw.stratus.com> jmann@bigbootay.sw.stratus.com (Jim Mann) writes:
>One big reason for DOS over Unix is that DOS is friendly to the 
>non-computer whiz.  (And that's saying a lot, since DOS has its
>problems.)  For example, to display a file under DOS, I use
>'type' or the near-universal bit of freeware 'd'. That's lots
>easier to remember than 'cat.'

Ah, but it's easier *yet* to remember 'more.'  And you don't need to
have it pathed and add that silly < wunder UNIX like DOS requires.  And
you can skip ahead to the good parts with swift pattern matching under
UNIX with /findthesechars.  And you can advance by line or page and even
retreat!

I agree that certain UNIX commands are ugly to folks used to DOS.  But 
there are better examples to use than 'type'!!!

-Just another DOS User trying to learn a *real* operating system now... :)

"Moby" Dick O'Connor                            ** DISCLAIMER: It would
Washington Department of Fisheries              ** surprise me if the
Olympia, Washington  98504                      ** rest of the Department
Internet Mail: djo7613@blake.u.washington.edu   ** agreed with any of this!