Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!unido!fauern!tumuc!lan!rommel
From: rommel@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de (Kai-Uwe Rommel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. Unix
Message-ID: <1041@tuminfo1.lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de>
Date: 10 Jan 90 10:00:55 GMT
References: <2590cf5b@ralf> <1022@tuminfo1.lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de> <380@sixhub.UUCP>
Sender: news@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de
Reply-To: rommel@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de (Kai-Uwe Rommel)
Organization: Inst. fuer Informatik, TU Muenchen, W. Germany
Lines: 39

In article <380@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
>In article <1022@tuminfo1.lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de> rommel@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de (Kai-Uwe Rommel) writes:
>| for which both OS/2 and Xenix/286 were designed). And the OS/2-386
>| version will support demand paging too. 
>
>paging (as I think you mean it) will be supported, you should add the
>word "probably" to the statement, so people will realize that you have
>access to the same rumors as everyoine else.

Look to BYTE of January, I was told that there was to read that IBM
announced OS/2 2.0 for the 386 with demand paging.

>|                                          Also, take a look on OS/2's
>| dynamic linking (ever heard about dynamic linking of Unix versions on
>| 286/386 class computers ?). 

>  386 UNIX has shared libraries. It's not clear how often dynamic
>linking produces a benefit to the user.

I have seen a SCO Unix 386 which supports shared libraries - but nobody
uses it. All the X applications like xclock, xload and so on which I
have seen, were about 250k each. Comparable OS/2 PM programs are about
20k in size.

>| 286/386 class computers ?). And, the separate screen groups for
>| concurrently executing processes are fine. Of course, PC versions of
>| Unix also have this feature, but did you ever work on a Unix terminal
>| (alpha) having two or more processes running on your terminal and all
>| of them producing output to you ?

>  Of course. What are you trying to imply without actually saying it
>here? 

You will have garbage and intermixed output from all programs - clear
now ?

Kai Uwe Rommel
Munich
rommel@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de