Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.aix:48578 comp.unix.bsd:15509 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:7673 comp.unix.solaris:28006 comp.unix.unixware:14962 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!udel!news.mathworks.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.mtholyoke.edu!nntp.et.byu.edu!news.provo.novell.com!bikini!darrend From: darrend@bikini.USG.Sandy.Novell.COM (Darren R. Davis) Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.unixware Subject: Re: Unix for PC Date: 9 Dec 1994 16:25:48 GMT Organization: Novell Inc. Lines: 55 Distribution: world Message-ID: <3ca0ec$qqt@bantu.Provo.Novell.COM> References: <3bvmo1$hgr@cascade.pnw.net> <D0Ex7E.2nv@ssbunews.ih.att.com> <3c4rhh$54a@bantu.provo.novell.com> <3c5cos$bhb@crl7.crl.com> <D0I0Fn.Avr@telly.on.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: bikini.usg.sandy.novell.com In article <D0I0Fn.Avr@telly.on.ca>, evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch) writes: |> In article <3c5cos$bhb@crl7.crl.com>, |> J. Heather Patrick <jpatrick@crl.com> wrote: |> |> >In article <3c4rhh$54a@bantu.provo.novell.com>, |> > Darren R. Davis <darrend@bikini.USG.Sandy.Novell.COM> wrote: |> |> >>UnixWare is just as capable OS as is Solaris. |> |> >Not. |> |> Hey, folks, this is really well intentioned and all, but has the makings |> of a classic computer-religion noisefest. I thought everyone'd learned |> their lessons after exposure to the Linux crew. |> |> >1) cachefs |> >2) better NFS in general |> >3) thread support |> >4) a much more standard and full set of code libraries |> >5) a better X server |> >6) a better X environment |> >7) MAE availability [on sparc] |> >8) working man pages |> >9) a proper sysvr4 kernal that doesn't have to be compiled |> >10) better compilers/tools available (centerline, purify, ...) [on sparc] |> |> While hoping not to get (too deeply :-) dragged in, I'll note that |> Heather's points 7 and 10 don't apply to this context, which is purely |> one of Intel Solaris vs. Intel UnixWare. |> |> Regardless of which side eventually wins this particular pissing match, |> please try to use more useful adjectives than "better" or "more standard" |> or (worst of all) "proper" when flying your particular flag in the future. |> |> Some of us are actually interested in *meaningful* comparisons; |> this wasn't one of them. |> |> -- |> Evan Leibovitch, Sound Software Ltd., located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario |> Novell Unix Master Reseller / evan@telly.on.ca / (905) 452-0504 |> Are vegetarians allowed to eat animal crackers? This WAS my whole point. I am not interested in getting into a pissing match about my OS versus your OS, we know where that leads. What I was trying to point out, is if I was givin the task of choosing OSes I would not believe ANY subjective statement like my X is better than your X, and your feature really sucks. I would establish myself an acceptance criteria idependant of any OS I was using and then measure these OSes OBJECTIVELY to this standard. Then *ALL* I would know is I have the best OS that meets my criteria. BUT I CAUTION, check all the numbers and features. AND THROUGH ALL THE OPINION IN THE TRASH WERE IT BELONGS! Darren R. Davis UnixWare Developer Support Engineer Novell Developer Support