In defense of BSD (was: something else)

[Dave Cornutt]

The following are my opinions only.  I hope that my .signature disclaimer would
make that clear, but I'm saying it here anyway just in case.  This is not an
attempt to pick on Henry Spencer or anyone else in particular; I just chose
a qoute from him because it was the first one I found while grepping articles.
This is not an attempt to start a flaming war.  I don't particularly care to
start another round of SysV vs. BSD arguemnts, especially since the point will
probably be moot a year from now.  I just think that there are some people
who are being done an injustice in this newsgroup, and I want to give them
their due.

In article <1988May29.004027.4179 at utzoo.uucp> henry at utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
 > And the major experience we've had so far with university control of Unix,
 > to wit BSD, has not been exactly encouraging to those who prefer software
 > to remain compatible unless there is a good reason to change it.

Sorry.  I just can't let this go by.  I am just about fed up with all of the
gratuitous Berkeley-bashing that has been going on here the last couple
of months.  I know of quite a few people out there who put in long, hard
hours (with little or no pay) to benefit every person who uses any Unix
system today (even SV versions).  Without them driving the development
process through the 1098's, we'd all still be using V7 systems, and
Unix would never have gotten to where it is now.  Sure, they introduced
some incompatible changes and features that were difficult and awkward
to use, but before you criticize them for it, remember that in many
cases they had *no prior art* to use as a guideline.  And without some
of those changes, a bunch of stuff that we take for granted today simply
would not exist, because no one else would ever take the time and effort,
and go through the heartbreak and frustration, of trying to do something
for the first time.  And Berkeley has been mostly tolerant and good-
natured about accepting and incorporating outside suggestions, unlike
AT&T, where "Not Invented Here" is a religious dogma.  (And don't flame
me for speculating, because I'm not... I've seen it first-hand; it
is embedded into the highest levels of corporate policy here.)

Berkeley has a lot to do with the popularity of Unix today.  They kept
it alive at a time when AT&T didn't seem to be interested in carrying
it any further (partly due to the divestiture, which was a huge
distraction and took up a lot of people's time).  They carried it to
the Vax hardware, which was the up-and-coming thing at the time.
They gave it the gift of paging.  (Yes, I know that the Vax paging
code originated with 32V.  When was the last time you used 32V?)
They added networking code that has
become an indispensible part of today's mini and workstation setups.
Without all this, Unix might have died by 1985, pushed out by VMS
and other proprietary systems.  It's not too surprising that over
half of the mini and workstation vendors that entered the market in
the mid-80's chose BSD as their porting base.  There was no
realistic alternative at the time.

Just so everyone knows where I stand... I believe that there are a lot
of talented and dedicated people at AT&T.  The same is true of Berkeley.
If you can't accept that someone outside of your own organization or
ideological group can ever come up with a good idea, then that's your
problem, not mine.  I intend to take advantage of good things wherever
I find them, whether that is at AT&T, Berkeley, Sun, OSF, or whatever.
-- 
Dave Cornutt, AT&T Bell Labs (rm 4A406,x1088), Holmdel, NJ
UUCP:{ihnp4,allegra,cbosgd}!hotly!dkc
"The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily my employer's, not
necessarily mine, and probably not necessary"