Aucbvax.5925
fa.info-vax
utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!info-vax
Sat Jan 23 06:22:06 1982

>From RWK@MIT-MC Sat Jan 23 06:18:43 1982
In-reply-to: The message of 22 Jan 82 01:10-EST from RJF at MIT-MC

   From: RJF@MIT-MC
   Date: 01/22/82 01:10:39
   Subject: unix vs. vms.
   ...  Work done on VMS is less portable.
Operating-system/machine independence is a virtue often overlooked by
those who program in C.  BLISS is much more portable between
byte-addressable machines and non-byte-addressable machines, just to
compare with the other major "implementation language".  If you're
REALLY interested in portability above all the other issues, use
FORTRAN.

   2. While UNIX may not have exactly the features you want, there is
   a somewhat receptive community considering changes, and thus mis-features
   may be corrected.  Even whole subsystems (e.g. file system) can be
   altered.  VMS, by comparison, has a much more diverse constituency,
   including COBOL types,
And is usable by a more diverse consituency.
   the code is expensive to change (even to get
   a copy of the code in machine-readable form is moderately big bucks),
   and it seems that DEC is (probably for good financial reasons)
   not eager to shake its own boat.

I think DEC has a much more reasonable viewpoint of the apropriate
modularity for system enhancements.  I can ship CHAOSnet software that
includes 2 or 3 device drivers and a couple of new system calls, and it
can be installed by any competent system manager (not system hacker!) in
15 minutes with no need for editing the source code, and no possibility
of conflicting with other features edited into the source for other
enhancements obtained elsewhere.

It is NOT so much a feature that you CAN modify the unix system to put
in new features, rather it is a BUG that you HAVE to.

Of course, it is true that sometimes you can't get what you want without
modifications, but with a flexible and rich inner system this is reduced
to a rarity.

Another feature of VMS is that DEC has no committment to running it or any
application software on PDP-11's.  While I am sympathetic to the desire
to retrofit powerful software to PDP-11's, I fear this may hold back unix's
evolution.

I think the problems with VMS are easier to fix than those with unix,
and some of them are even fixed in the next release.  I hope neither
side is too close-minded to adopt the strong points of the other, or to
look to other machines for more enhancements.  I really think "unix
people" get wrapped up in their missionary zeal sometimes and forget to
look around them.  It is obvious to me that the same happened to the
original VMS designers; they didn't even look at TOPS-20!

-----------------------------------------------------------------
gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <[email protected]>
of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/


This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:

1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.

2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:

The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.

You are viewing proxied material from gopher.quux.org. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.