home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix.sco
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!destroyer!mudos!mju
- From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
- Subject: Re: Xenix considered harmful (was Re: SCO support - a success story)
- Message-ID: <Bu6Bpp.AG8@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us>
- Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:32:11 GMT
- References: <9209061050.AA05570@dynamix.com>
- Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI
- Lines: 69
-
- In article <9209061050.AA05570@dynamix.com> david@dynamix.com (David L Jarvis) writes:
- >How about all those segmentation violations that arose from the 286 not
- >having hardware memory protection?
-
- Well, we're picking nits here, but I can't resist. During most of my
- experience with Xenix/286, you'd get a machine lockup more frequently
- than you'd get a segvio. Segvios were more frequently caused by
- a large-model program that tried to assume pointers and ints were the
- same size.
-
- >Why haven't you forced this client and others like them to switch to Unix?
- >WOW!!! Could it be that ... perhaps ... they don't NEED Unix???!!!
- >You said it yourself Marc, Xenix serves their needs just fine, and THATS
- >what we've all been saying right along ...
-
- Well, we haven't switched them to Unix because they don't have the
- money and because there was really no need. However, they very
- narrowly averted the need quite recently: Their 2400bps modem broke,
- and they were thinking about getting a V.32 or V.32bis modem to
- replace it. Good thing they decided to go with another 2400bps modem,
- because I doubt their 286/10 running Xenix/286 would have been able to
- keep up with a V.32 or V.32bis modem.
-
- >So what I meant by mature and stable was that it's had more time to have
- >all the major problems resolved, and to become more refined ...
-
- I'd hardly call Xenix "refined". "Old", maybe, but old does not
- mature make.
-
- >What would inittab provide that /etc/ttys doesn't? Under *normal*
- >circumstances, /etc/ttys w/ enable/disable does just fine.
-
- Uh, there are lots of things you can do with inittab that you can't do
- with /etc/ttys. Like spawn something that's not called "/etc/getty".
- There are other things I could go into, but they have more to do with
- the SysV-style rc scripts vs. the V7-style rc scripts.
-
- >Oh please ... the configure script makes this simple and painless ...
- >who cares what "style" configuration the system uses as long as it
- >works ... I've never once had a problem configuring Xenix ...
-
- You obviously haven't ever tried to add more than one or two
- third-party drivers to a Xenix system. I have. And then I had to
- clean up the link_xenix script with an editor because the drivers had
- each stomped on each other.
-
- >Nope - I've always used smail ... never had a problem with it either
- >(why buy an inferior SCO product when a free on will do?)
-
- That's not the point. We could all go run BSD/386 instead of SCO, or
- replace our entire /bin and /usr/bin with the GNU equivalents.
- Sure, you *can* get domain-based e-mail running on a Xenix system, but
- it's an unbelievable amount of trouble to rip out the Xenix e-mail
- system and replace it with your own.
-
- >So Unix is better than Xenix because you don't want to learn Xenix?
- >Sure it's different, but are all Unixes out there the same? Hell no.
-
- Yes, Unix is better than Xenix because it's the same as other
- Unix-based products. Again, we're coming back the standards argument.
- The primary reason a lot of our customers use Unix on PCs is because
- it interoperates well with their other Unix machines. Xenix *may* be
- appropriate if interoperability is not and never will be a concern,
- but I don't believe *anyone* can say that in this day and age.
-
- --
- Marc Unangst | Real men don't use Windows. Real men use X.
- mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us | Only a real man would use a GUI where the
- | shift keys after "Alt" are "Super" and "Hyper."
-