'386 Unix Wars

[Larry Snyder]

jgd at Dixie.Com (John G. DeArmond) writes:

>Plus Esix is a dog performance wise.  I benchmarked it against many other
>machines for my last client's fairly large project.  Our benchmark 
>performed typical transaction-styled database lookups and modifications.

I've heard this from several others --

>What this tells me is that the Esix port is pure AT&T file system without
>any performance enhancements at all.  The compaq was most impressive coupled
>with the new release of ISC.

what release of ESIX were you using?  I understood that D contained
the BSD FFS --

>Yeah, SCO is pretty much all 'round bad.  Even though ISC has their stupid
>little authorization-style copy protection, it is no where near as bad
>as SCO's.  I think SCO is following in the footsteps that IBM laid with
>the PC and is giving up the lead through sheer stupidity.

I agree - only the OS and Visix contain serial numbers (with 2.20 ISC)

>credit where it is due.  Their performance and their documentation are
>excellent.  Hey Interactive!  How about rediscovering the spirit that must
>exist in the tech writing department and applying it to your support
>policies.  And can the authorization manager and call it a bad wet dream.
>Ok?  And stick the Korn shell in the distribution just for good measure.

ISC 2.20 and SCSI is a screamer - no doubt about it.  

-- 
       Larry Snyder, Northern Star Communications, Notre Dame, IN USA 
  {larry at nstar.rn.com, uunet!nstar!larry, larry%nstar at iuvax.cs.indiana.edu}
                     backbone usenet newsfeeds available
         Public Access Unix Site (219) 289-0282 (5 high speed lines)