THE MYTHS OF UNIX IS UNIX REALLY THAT BAD? IF NOT, THEN WHY IS IT SO SUCCESSFUL? REPRINTED FROM THE FOURGEN UNIX JOURNAL FOR YEARS NOW, WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF CRITICISM OF UNIX. WE'VE HEARD THAT IT'S NON-STANDARD. IT'S TOO SLOW. IT'S TOO HARD TO USE. THERE ARE NO APPLICATIONS THAT RUN UNDER IT. IT WILL BE REPLACED BY PICK, VM, CONCURRENT DOS, OS/2, NETWORKS. THE LIST GOES ON AND ON. MEANWHILE, EVERY MAJOR COMPUTER MANUFACTURER HAS BEEN RELEASING NEW MACHINES THAT RUN UNDER UNIX. SEVERAL COMPANIES HAVE CONVERTED THEIR ENTIRE COMPUTER LINE OVER TO UNIX-BASED HARDWARE. SOFTWARE COMPANIES THAT SELL UNIX PRODUCTS ARE AMONG THE FASTEST GROWING IN THE SOFTWARE INDUSTRY. MORE AND MORE MAJOR SOFTWARE MAKERS ARE RELEASING UNIX VERSIONS OF THEIR POPULAR PRODUCTS. ACCORDING TO HARDWARE MANUFACTURERS, 15% OR MORE OF ALL NEW 386 SYSTEMS ARE BEING SOLD TO SUPPORT UNIX OR XENIX. IF THE CRITICS ARE CORRECT, THE MARKET MUST BE CRAZY. THE DISPARITY BETWEEN WHAT WE'VE HEARD ABOUT UNIX AND WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE MARKETPLACE SHOULD MAKE US WONDER. IF UNIX IS SO BAD, WHY IS IT SO SUCCESSFUL? OR, TO TAKE IT FROM ANOTHER ANGLE, WHY HAS UNIX BEEN SO MALIGNED DESPITE ITS ACCEPTANCE IN THE MARKETPLACE? WHY CRITICISM ABOUNDS FIRST, LET ME MAKE MY POSITION CLEAR. MOST OF THE CRITICISM THAT'S HEARD ABOUT UNIX IS SIMPLY INCORRECT. IT IS IGNORANCE PASSING AS INFORMATION. IN THIS ARTICLE WE SHALL DISCUSS MANY OF THESE POPULAR MYTHS ABOUT UNIX, BUT FIRST LET US CONSIDER WHY CRITICISM IS SO PLENTIFUL. I GROUP UNIX CRITICS INTO THREE DIFFERENCE CATEGORIES. FIRST, THERE ARE THE EXPERTS WHO ARE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH ANYTHING OUTSIDE THEIR EXPERTISE. WHEN THIS TYPE OF PERSON ENCOUNTERS A NEW ENVIRONMENT, THEIR NATURAL TENDENCY IS TO LOOK FOR ITS FLAWS. SINCE SO MANY OF TODAY'S "EXPERTS" GREW UP IN THE SINGLE-USER MS-DOS WORLD, THEY HAVE LITTLE EXPERIENCE WITH THE TYPE OF ENVIRONMENT REPRESENTED BY UNIX. WHEN THEY ARE EXPOSED TO IT, THEY ARE INTIMIDATED AND, THEREFORE, CRITICAL. NEXT, WE HAVE COMPETITORS. THESE CRITICS ARE SELLING PRODUCTS THAT COMPETE WITH UNIX AND THEY ARE GOING TO FOCUS THE DEBATE ON THE WEAKNESSES OF THEIR COMPETITION. SINCE UNIX DOESN'T HAVE AN ORGANIZED GROUP OF PROPONENTS, ITS OPPONENTS HAVE CONTROLLED MUCH OF WHAT WE HEAR ABOUT THE OPERATING SYSTEM. YOU CAN SAY ALMOST ANYTHING YOU WANT ABOUT UNIX AND NOT BE CHALLENGED TO SUPPORT YOUR ACCUSATIONS. FINALLY, WE HAVE THE PURISTS. THIS SPECIMEN IS AN IDEALIST FOR WHOM NO PRODUCT IS FAST ENOUGH, EFFICIENT ENOUGH, SIMPLE ENOUGH, OR POWERFUL ENOUGH. UNFORTUNATELY, MANY UNIX USERS THEMSELVES FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY. IT IS PERHAPS A COMPLIMENT THAT UNIX ATTRACTS THIS KIND OF PERSON, WHEN SO MANY UNIX EXPERTS TALK MAINLY ABOUT ITS DEFECTS. THE GENERAL PUBLIC CAN EASILY GET THE WRONG IMPRESSION. WHAT KINDS OF THINGS ARE THESE VARIOUS GROUPS SAYING ABOUT UNIX AND WHAT IS TRUE? MYTH #1: THERE IS NO "STANDARD" VERSION OF UNIX. A STATEMENT CAN BE AT ONCE THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH AND VERY MISLEADING. THIS IS PERHAPS THE MOST WIDELY MISUNDERSTOOD ASPECT OF UNIX. EVEN PEOPLE WORKING ON UNIX SYSTEMS ARE UNDER THE GENERAL IMPRESSION THAT SOMEHOW THEIR SYSTEM IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM OTHER PEOPLE'S UNIX SYSTEMS. WHAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND IS THAT FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, UNIX IS UNIX AND XENIX IS UNIX AND A LOT OF OTHER THINGS ARE UNIX AS WELL. THESE VARIOUS VERSIONS OF THE OPERATING SYSTEM ARE MORE SIMILAR THAN THEY ARE DIFFERENT. THEY ARE, FOR EXAMPLE, MUCH MORE SIMILAR THAN 2.0 AND 3.0 MS-DOS. THE˙DIFFERENCES MIGHT BE COMPARED MORE TO THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PC-DOS AND MS-DOS. SURE THERE ARE DIFFERENCES AT VARIOUS LEVELS, BUT WHO CARES? NON-BINARY SOFTWARE THAT RUNS ON ONE CAN RUN UNDER THE OTHER. THE PROBLEM WITH DEFINING A "STANDARD" UNIX IS MORE AN EMBARRASSMENT OF RICHES THAN ANYTHING ELSE. SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE MADE SO MANY ENHANCEMENTS TO THEIR UNIX THAT THEY SERVE TO EXPAND THE DEFINITION OF UNIX RATHER THAN REFINE IT. UNIX ALSO RUNS ON A VARIETY OF PROCESSORS AND, AS IS ALWAYS THE CASE WHEN YOU PORT OVER VARIOUS PROCESSORS, PROGRAMS HAVE TO BE RECOMPILED TO RUN, BUT THIS ISN'T THE FAULT OF UNIX, IT'S THE NATURE OF REALITY. WE'VE MADE HUNDREDS OF UNIX PORTS AND, COMPARED TO PORTS BETWEEN OTHER OPERATING SYSTEMS, IT'S A SNAP. MYTH #2: UNIX IS SLOW. THE QUESTION HERE IS NOT REALLY IS UNIX TOO SLOW. EVERYTHING IS TOO SLOW. THE QUESTION IS HOW DOES IT COMPARE WITH OTHER OPERATING SYSTEMS. NO ONE CLAIMS THAT MS-DOS IS TOO SLOW, BUT UNIX (IN THE GUISE OF SCO XENIX) RUNS MANY TIMES FASTER ON THE SAME BOX THAN DOES MS-DOS. IN PERFORMING ANY "OPERATING SYSTEM" INTENSIVE TASK SUCH AS DISK ACCESS OR SERIAL OUTPUT, MS-DOS RANGES FROM TWO TO TEN TIMES SLOWER IN BENCHMARKS AGAINST XENIX. THE MORE DISK ACCESS THE WORSE MS-DOS PERFORMS BY COMPARISON SIMPLY BECAUSE, UNLIKE CALCULATIONS, DISK ACCESS IS CONTROLLED PRIMARILY BY THE OPERATING SYSTEM. WHEN WE COMPARE UNIX TO OS/2 FOR SUPPORT OF MULTIPLE SIMULTANEOUS PROCESSES, RECENT TESTS HAVE SHOWN THAT, ON THE SAME HARDWARE, OS/2 STARTS OUT ABOUT THE SAME SPEED, BUT THEN DEGRADES AS MORE PROCESSES ARE ADDED ABOUT TEN TIMES FASTER THAN THE UNIX MACHINE. OS/2 USING THE SAME BASIC DISK ORGANIZATION AS MS-DOS HAS THE SAME PROBLEMS WITH SLOW DISK ACCESS. ARE THERE FASTER OPERATING SYSTEMS? FOR DOING CERTAIN THINGS, CERTAINLY. THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE OF OPERATING SYSTEMS THAT HAVE BEEN OPTIMIZED (AS YOU WOULD EXPECT MS-DOS TO BE) FOR ONE SPECIFIC TYPE OF HARDWARE. ARE THERE ANY OPERATING SYSTEMS THAT RUN ON AS WIDE A VARIETY OF HARDWARE THAT ARE FASTER? NO. MYTH #3: UNIX IS TOO HARD TO USE. ONCE MORE, EVERYTHING IS TOO HARD TO USE, BUT IF WE COMPARE UNIX WITH MS-DOS, WE DISCOVER THAT, FOR DOING SIMILAR TASKS -- CREATING DIRECTORIES, COPYING AND MOVING FILES, AND OTHER COMMON HOUSEKEEPING TASKS -- UNIX COMMANDS ARE NO MORE DIFFICULT THAN THEIR MS-DOS COUNTERPARTS. BOTH SYSTEMS REQUIRE THAT YOU MEMORIZE THE COMMANDS AND THEIR SYNTAX. THIS IS A PRETTY COMPLICATED FORM OF OPERATING SYSTEM CONTROL, BUT, IF YOU WANT SOMETHING EASIER, YOU CAN BY AN EASY-TO-USE "SHELL" FOR EITHER SYSTEM THAT PROMPTS YOU THROUGH ALL THE COMMANDS. THE PROBLEM WITH UNIX IS NOT THAT IT IS HARDER THAN MS-DOS, BUT THAT IT IS SO MUCH MORE POWERFUL. WHERE MS-DOS HAS A COUPLE OF DOZEN DIFFERENT THINGS YOU CAN DO AT THE OPERATING SYSTEM LEVEL, UNIX PROVIDES HUNDREDS. THE DEPTH AND POWER OF UNIX IS VERY INTIMIDATING, BUT YOU MUST REMEMBER THAT YOU AREN'T REQUIRED TO KNOW IT ALL TO USE THE SYSTEM. YOU USE WHAT YOU KNOW AND EXPAND ON YOUR KNOWLEDGE ON AN ON-GOING BASIS. NO ONE EVER FINISHES LEARNING UNIX. UNIX UTILITIES SUCH AS THE VISUAL EDITOR "VI" ARE SO POWERFUL THAT YOU CAN STILL BE LEARNING NEW FEATURES AFTER YOU HAVE BEEN USING THE PRODUCT FOR YEARS. THE OPERATING SYSTEM DEPTH AND POWER IS ONE OF THE REASONS UNIX IS SO POPULAR. ALL OF THE HUNDREDS, PERHAPS THOUSANDS, OF FUNCTIONS YOU FIND ONLY ON A UNIX SYSTEM ARE ALL OF THE THINGS THAT USERS OF A SOPHISTICATED COMPUTER WANT TO USE AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER. THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT ON UNIX, THESE FUNCTIONS ARE ALREADY AVAILABLE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO FIND, BUY OR WRITE THEM. YOU JUST HAVE TO LEARN THEM. MYTH #4: THERE ARE NO APPLICATIONS FOR UNIX. THIS IS PERHAPS THE STRANGEST CLAIM OF ALL, SINCE THE REASON THAT MOST COMPUTER MANUFACTURERS BUILD UNIX MACHINES IS BECAUSE THERE *ARE* SO MANY APPLICATIONS AVAILABLE. AS THE FIRST OPERATING SYSTEM THAT SPANS ALL TYPES OF HARDWARE, FROM MICRO-COMPUTERS TO SUPER COMPUTERS, THE APPLICATION BASE FOR UNIX IS UNRIVALED IN THE COMPUTER WORLD EXCEPT FOR THOSE APPLICATIONS WRITTEN FOR MS-DOS. THERE ARE CERTAINLY MORE APPLICATIONS WRITTEN FOR MS-DOS THAN THERE ARE APPLICATIONS WRITTEN FOR UNIX. BUT FOR MULTI-USER, MULTI-TASKING SYSTEMS UNIX IS UNRIVALED. THERE IS A PROBLEM, HOWEVER, WITH APPLICATION AVAILABILITY. IN THE UNIX WORLD, MOST APPLICATIONS ARE NOT PACKAGED FOR RETAIL SALE. ALMOST ALL APPLICATIONS ARE SOLD DIRECTLY BY THE MANUFACTURER, INSTALLING IT AT USER SITES, OR BY VARS. SINCE THERE IS NO RETAIL MARKET FOR UNIX, THERE REALLY HASN'T BEEN MUCH OF AN EFFORT TO COLLECT AND DISTRIBUTE UNIX APPLICATIONS IN AN ORGANIZED FASHION. PACKAGES ARE AVAILABLE, BUT THE MARKET FOR UNIX MUST BECOME MORE ORGANIZED BEFORE THE HOW AND WHERE OF APPLICATION BUYING IS SIMPLIFIED. MYTH #5: UNIX WILL BE REPLACED BY OS/2. WE'VE HEARD THIS OVER AND OVER: THE NEXT "THING" IS GOING TO REPLACE UNIX. IT'S BEEN SAID ABOUT PICK, VM AND CONCURRENT DOS. ALL OF THESE PRODUCTS ARE JUST SURVIVING IN A MARKET IN WHICH UNIX IS COMING TO DOMINATE. NOW IT'S OS/2'S TURN. FIRST, UNIX, AS AN OPERATING SYSTEM STANDARD, CAN'T BE REPLACED BY ANY ONE OPERATING SYSTEM. THIS IS BECAUSE NO OPERATING SYSTEM IS AVAILABLE ON THE RANGE OF MACHINES ON WHICH UNIX IS OFFERED. ONLY PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING EXCLUSIVELY AT THE INTEL MICRO-COMPUTER WORLD FORSEE SOME KIND OF DOMINANCE BY OS/2. [I DOUBT THAT YOU'LL SEE OS/2 ON THE CRAY 2 -- UNIX, UNDER THE NAME OF UNICOS IS ALREADY OPERATING NICELY THERE. -ED.] EVEN IF YOU LOOK AT JUST MICRO-COMPUTERS, THE IDEA THAT OS/2 IS GOING TO OUTMODE UNIX IS CLEARLY A FANTASY. OS/2 IS A SINGLE USER OPERATING SYSTEM. UNIX IS A MULTI-USER OPERATING SYSTEM. AS LONG AS THERE IS A DEMAND FOR MULTI-USER SYSTEMS -- AND THAT DEMAND IS DRAMATICALLY INCREASING AS NEW PROCESSORS MAKE MULTI-USER SYSTEM MORE AFFORDABLE -- UNIX HAS A MARKET. MICROSOFT, THE MAKERS OF OS/2, HAVE SAID OVER AND OVER THAT OS/2 WILL NEVER BE A MULTI-USER OPERATING SYSTEM. OS/2 MACHINES CAN BE LINKED INTO NETWORKS, BUT DON'T SUPPORT MULTIPLE USERS ON A SINGLE PROCESSOR. MYTH #6: UNIX WILL BE REPLACED BY NETWORKS. UNIX DOESN'T COMPETE WITH NETWORKS, IT SUPPORTS THEM. NETWORKS ARE GOING TO BECOME MORE POPULAR. UNIX-BASED NETWORKS ARE GOING TO BECOME EVEN MORE POPULAR BECAUSE THEY SUPPORT ALL TYPES OF VERY DIFFERENT SYSTEMS. NOTHING OFFERS THE RANGE OF COMMUNICATION AND NETWORKING FEATURES THAT UNIX DOES, AND BECAUSE OF THAT, WE EXPECT TO SEE THE NETWORK MARKET BECOME MORE AND MORE DOMINATED BY UNIX-BASED SYSTEMS. DOES THIS MEAN THE MAIN USE OF UNIX IN THE MICRO-COMPUTER WORLD WILL BE AS A FILE SERVER? CERTAINLY NOT. BECAUSE OF ECONOMIC FACTORS, THE MARKET FOR UNIX MULTI-USER SYSTEMS WHERE USERS WORK AT INEXPENSIVE DUMB TERMINALS WILL CONTINUE TO GROW FASTER THAN THE GENERAL MARKET. FOR SUPPORTING MULTIPLE USERS IN A WORK ENVIRONMENT, NETWORKS ARE TWO TO THREE TIMES MORE EXPENSIVE THAN A UNIX-BASED SYSTEM. PERHAPS THE COST FACTOR IS UNIMPORTANT TO A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF COMPUTER PURCHASERS, BUT THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS WHO CAN'T AFFORD A MULTI-USER SYSTEM AT THAT PRICE. THESE CUSTOMERS HAVE BOUGHT AND WILL CONTINUE TO BY UNIX-BASED SYSTEMS. WHY UNIX? WHY DOES UNIX CONTINUE TO PROSPER? IT IS THE ONLY STANDARD FOR MULTI-USER SYSTEMS. FOR APPLICATIONS DEVELOPERS WHO WANT TO DEVELOP MULTI-USER PROGRAMS, IT IS THE ONE PLATFORM FOR WHICH THEY CAN DEVELOP SOFTWARE AND BE ASSURED THAT THAT SOFTWARE WILL RUN ON A WIDE VARIETY OF MACHINES. IT GIVES HARDWARE DEVELOPERS AN EXISTING BASE OF APPLICATIONS FOR NEW MACHINES. IT GIVES SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS INDEPENDENCE FROM ANY ONE MACHINE OR MANUFACTURER. RECOGNIZING THIS, BOTH HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS ARE TURNING TOWARD UNIX AS THEIR FUTURE. COMPARED WITH MS-DOS AND OS/2, ITS SINGLE-USER COUSINS, UNIX IS FASTER AND INFINITELY MORE POWERFUL. AS THE POPULARITY OF UNIX-BASED NETWORKS GROWS, WE EXPECT THAT MORE AND MORE DOS USERS WILL DISCOVER THE MANY BENEFITS OF USING UNIX. AS PEOPLE TURN MORE TOWARD MULTI-USER INSTALLATIONS, COST FACTORS WILL ALSO CONTINUE TO INCREASE THE DISTRIBUTION OF UNIX-BASED SYSTEMS. FINALLY, AS HARDWARE TECHNOLOGY MOVE FORWARD, COMPUTER MANUFACTURERS HAVE A SIMPLE CHOICE: DO THEY DEVELOP A NEW OPERATING SYSTEM FOR EACH NEW HARDWARE TECHNOLOGY OR DO THEY UTILIZE UNIX? DEVELOPING A NEW OPERATING SYSTEM CAN COST MILLIONS AND TAKE YEARS. AFTER DEVELOPING ANY NEW OPERATING SYSTEM, THERE ARE NO APPLICATIONS THAT RUN ON IT. IN COMPARISON, UNIX IS READY NOW AND THE OEM LICENSE COSTS A SMALL FRACTION OF WHAT IS WOULD COST TO DEVELOP A NEW OPERATING SYSTEM. AS A BONUS, WHEN YOU USE UNIX YOU INHERIT A LARGE BASE OF ALREADY WRITTEN APPLICATIONS. IF YOU WERE RUNNING A COMPUTER COMPANY, WHICH ROUTE WOULD YOU CHOOSE? YOU CAN TEST YOUR GUESS AGAINST THE MARKETPLACE. MOTOROLA JUST RELEASED A NEW PROCESSOR CHIP SET CALLED THE 88000. HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT TO BET THAT UNIX IS THE FIRST OPERATING SYSTEM OFFERED FOR FOR THE COMPUTER USING THIS CHIP? SINCE NEW HARDWARE IS INEVITABLE, UNIX IS INEVITABLE. DESPITE WHAT YOU MAY HAVE HEARD, UNIX IS THE FUTURE. X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X Another file downloaded from: NIRVANAnet(tm) & the Temple of the Screaming Electron Jeff Hunter 510-935-5845 Rat Head Ratsnatcher 510-524-3649 Burn This Flag Zardoz 408-363-9766 realitycheck Poindexter Fortran 415-567-7043 Lies Unlimited Mick Freen 415-583-4102 Specializing in conversations, obscure information, high explosives, arcane knowledge, political extremism, diversive sexuality, insane speculation, and wild rumours. ALL-TEXT BBS SYSTEMS. Full access for first-time callers. We don't want to know who you are, where you live, or what your phone number is. We are not Big Brother. "Raw Data for Raw Nerves" X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X