VMS & UNIX comparison rebutal (not as long as it looks)

[Marc E. Kenig]

<(*RSET NIL)>

   I hate articles like this, and am sure that the original author can rebut 
as well as I, but I'd like to jump into the argument anyway.

 ignatz at ihuxx.UUCP (Dave Ihnat, Chicago, IL) writes:
>...which Dave has obviously misunderstood in his defense of VMS over
>UNIX, and that I think are quite important to keep in mind........

"VMS OVER Unix", I'm sorry, but I thought it was a comparison.
Why are Unix bigots always so damned defensive?

>>VMS tends to get more performance out of its hardware, through
>>clustering, asynchronous IO, and good paging.  These things can be tuned
>>for a particular installation, though they can also be mistuned.

>......if they wrote machine-specific code, they could usually get gobs
>of performance improvements on their machine.  And only on it.  Unix
>can be moved across machines with architectures and capabilities as
>widely differing as an IBM-PC, a VAX 11/780, and a Univax 1180.,

Oh my.  I seem to have heard all this before.  Let me rephrase the first point:
If Unix had more machine specific code, it would be more difficult to port.
Unix "can be moved across machines with architectures and capabilities" 
easily because it seems the people who move it CHOSE TO IGNORE THE UNIQUE
CAPABILITIES and ARCHITECTURES OF THOSE MACHINES. Case in point: the VAX.
Ignore the FPA and the Virtual memory and what have you got?  Right, a 
PDP-11/40.  Whoopee! It's even more cruel to do this to a larger machine
like a Cray.  Says Unix-porter, "Nothing easier if we ignore the vectorizing."
Giving the power of an 11/70 to an IBM-PC is a noble thing, giving it to a
VAX reminds me of a Ben Franklin quote:  "Calling a steer a 'bull' is a
compliment; he's grateful for the compliment, but he'd rather have restored
what's rightfully his".

YOU explain to your average MBA type why all the complaints about performance
on the machine HE approved. See how much OS theory he understands. 

>C will be around long after Unix is used as an obsolete example in...CS courses

Sounds like prophesies of PASCAL from circa 1975, ALGOL 68 from 1969, etc.
See how right they were.....If your right, I'll learn Japanese.

>...commands--which should, rightly, be compared to both command and OS
>bugs on VMS combined, since so much of a "traditional" OS has been
>moved from the kernel to external commands in Unix.
 
A quick look on SYS$SYSTEM: will obviate the same is the case for VMS.
Commands on VMS are also (and always have been) external to the kernal....

>I want to emphasize that Unix is immature, and has growing pains.  But
>the quite different concepts embodied in Unix make comparing it with mature,
>traditional OS's a task that should be undertaken with more care than,
>say, comparint PR1MOS IV with VMS...

*foof, sputter, buzz*  Excuse me, but Unix is OLDER than VMS. If you want 
Try comparing UNIX to true siblings, say TOPS-20 or RSX, for a revelation.
WHEN IS UNIX GOING TO GROW UP?

David and I seem only to agree on one specific point worth reiterating strongly:
All opinions and statements expressed herein are solely mine, and in
no way may be construed as reflecting the official or unofficial
opinions or attitudes of either my contractee, or my employer.

M. Kenig (" Share and enjoy")
...abnjh!cbspt002