I'm learning UNIX and I have a simple question

[Phil Hughes]

A long list of people have complained about inconsistent use of options
on the UNIX system.  Which I must agree with.  But here is some real-world
comparison information.

First, my history.  I work for SSC.  We publish a series of pocket-sized
books on UNIX and such.  In particular we publish a command summary for
various versions of UNIX.  Each book contains a list of the commands, a
one-line description and a description of all the options and arguments.
We also publish a similar summary for MS-DOS.

I have just finished updating the MS-DOS summary to version 5.  Previously
I updated the UNIX summary to V.4.  Historically, we have been publishing
these suckers since 1983.

If I didn't know the history of MS-DOS and UNIX I would expect that UNIX was
developed by one company and MS-DOS had evolved over the last 20 years.
As each new version of UNIX has been introduced, commands have been modified
to make arguments and options more consistent.  On the other hand, MS-DOS
commands have an amazing assortment of options.

As an example, I mention the emm386.sys command that goes in config.sys
for MS-DOS.  There are three ways to set the page frame address.  One
consists of a key letter followed by a number, the second is the word frame
followed by an equal sign and the third is /p followed by an address.

This is not to say that UNIX is perfect but the trend seems to be toward
consistency in UNIX and toward anarchy in MS-DOS.  At the moment I can
survive better without my UNIX Command Summary than without my MS-DOS
Reference Card.


-- 
Phil Hughes, SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155  (206)FOR-UNIX
     uunet!pilchuck!ssc!fyl or fyl at ssc.wa.com            (206)527-3385