Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 03:35:55 -0500 (CDT) From: Joe Grosch <joeg@interaccess.com> To: michaelv@HeadCandy.com (Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com) Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Opinions? Message-ID: <199607180835.DAA08975@flowbee.interaccess.com> In-Reply-To: <199607180623.XAA09725@MindBender.HeadCandy.com> from "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" at Jul 17, 96 11:23:41 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > [ DELETED ] >I'll add that I pretty much agree with everything he says. > >------- Forwarded Message > > Date: Thu, 18 Jul 96 02:08:36 -0400 > From: Matthew Jason White <mwhite+@CMU.EDU> > To: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" <michaelv@HeadCandy.com> > Subject: Re: Opinions? > >Excerpts from internet.computing.freebsd-current: 17-Jul-96 Re: >Opinions? by M. HeadCandy.com@HeadCan >> There are lots of other related areas where a free Unix, or even a >> commercial Unix, might be the best choice. Maybe some kind of network >> provider. Maybe a heavy-hit monster database server (although >> Microsoft has been getting lots of good press on their database >> performance). Maybe a huge simulation engine. Maybe just a monster >> compute server. > >Don't forget research boxes. Most research I know of uses software >running on Unix boxes of some sort. There are a number of reasons for >this ranging from simple tradition to the expressiveness of Unix >compared to other OSes. When you're writing a reference version of a >program, you don't want to be burdened with also writing a GUI for it at >the same time, which NT all but forces you to do (you *can* associate a >console with a program, but this is not the default). > >Further, I think it's also safe to assume that Unix will remain a >favorite among hackers everywhere just because it behaves the way we >expect an OS to behave and emphasizes the things that a hacker generally >wants emphasized. There's something about eighteen command pipelines >that appeal to almost every hacker I know. Obscure command lines also >seem aestheticly pleasing at times. So as long as hackers are valued >people in research and industry, Unix will most likely have a secure >home. > [ DELETED ] Another point to consider is the availability of source code. Back before a UNIX source code license went for over $100,000.00 university like CMU, Stanford, MIT, and of course, Berkeley had UNIX, in source code, for students to study and learn from. This developed a generation of hackers who understood, in great detail, how UNIX worked. So there were a lot more UNIX "experts" for industry to hire than there were VMS or MVS experts. And because there were at the beginning of their career instead of being 7 to 10 years into it as a simular MVS or VMS "expert" they were less costly. With NT, not many people outside of microsloth have seen the source code let alone had the time to study it. I would guess that microslime has no plans to license the source code anytime soon. So, I suspect that there will be fewer NT "experts" for quite awhile and it will take longer to grow them. With the free UNIXes (sic ?) we are creating another generation of hackers who come on to the job market with an in depth knowledge of UNIX. Plus it a lot harder to hide an API when you have access to the source code. Best thing of all, there is no faster way to end an argument about what the system is doing then pulling out the source code :-) It goes without saying that there are a number of hurdles for the free UNIXes. The first is support and the second is the industry attitude that unless they have paid for it, it has no value. Josef -- Josef Grosch - joeg@truenorth.org | "Laugh while you can, monkey boy." http://www.interaccess.com/users/joeg | - John Warfin - ==========================================================================
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607180835.DAA08975>