alt.religion.your.operating.system.sucks
I mean no disrespect, but the attrocities commited by the aged masters who wrote most of the operating systems are well documented. I have run into this line of thinking in many occasions (my <insert compiler or operating system> is better than yours...), although it it seems to be more of a sore spot to those who love thier compiler/ interpreter. Most of these observations are made out of ignorance. I get paid for programming under NT, windows, MS-DOS, VMS, RSX, and UNIX, not insulting the designers or users. Additionally, I deal with other people in other companies who love thier AS/400s and IBM mainframes. Hell there is even several programmers here who go misty-eyed everytime the word Amiga is mentioned. I bet there is even someone out there who believes that he/she could write a GUI operating system in COBOL (if someone has accomplished this I would love to see the punch cards...). UNIX is a programmers environment. It is very flexible, and you can do just about anything you want to, provided you have the ability. Spawning processes and child processes are trivial, and much more efficent compared to windows-NT and VMS. Additionally, I don't know of too many operating systems where the source code is floating around. I mean so what if it doesn't come with a pretty shrink wrapped package and a thick getting-started, if you have a question just go find the source code. Geez. And as far as a GUI, most of my work revolves around plain old ASCII. X windows may be "standard" now, but it didn't stop SUN, DEC, etc., from making their own proprietary (errr.. I mean "optimized") versions. I don't know why there is so much whining about: - My GUI interface sucks - Your GUI interface sucks - Your mother's interface sucks. I see no reason to puke up this garbage other people. VMS is more secure (interlock intrusion detection, etc.), but any operating system is only as strong as its users/administrators. The one thing I do not like about VMS is the way the system libraries are structured, but such is life. I was not consulted when DEC was designing the operating system. Thier Xwindows system needs some work, but it does work. NT is cool (if you are running on a 300MHz Sable). I think it is something special when you can run UNIX, Windows, and OpenVMS applications simultaniously on the same box. Can your operating system do that? Hell, for $3500 you can by a 166MHz alpha that will do this. System 7 is great. I just didn't like it. I didn't like the way I was isolated from the hardware, forced to take what the designers thought I needed. Just my preference. Besides, Apple equipment was, and still is overpriced (I should know I used to own several). Windows isn't a true multitasking operating system, and besides its like the old joke, Q: "how do you turn a 486/66 into a 286?" A: "run windows!". But like it or not, it is here to stay. I do like programming under windows over dos, simply because it is a pre-emptive operating system and forces the programmers to write structured code (for the most part) to intercept the messages. But the serial driver code sucks. PDP-11/RSX. Ewwwwww.. MS-DOS. If you want to write fast graphics, assembly is the way to go. Windows just can't keep up. Sure Micro$oft released win-G, but what's the point. Your operating system is so much better than mine are, as is your keyboard, your mouse, etc., My point is that every operating system, programming language, or whatever has benefits and detracting points. If you want to continue this discussion, I will be more than happy to create a list for it,.. then you can rant until you fingers are bloody. -- Joe N. Turner Telecheck International turner@telecheck.com 5251 Westheimer, PO BOX 4659, Houston, TX 77210-4659 compu$erv: 73301,1654 (800) 888-4922 * (713) 439-6597 Finger for PGP KEY.
On Sat, 28 Jan 1995, Joe Turner wrote:
Additionally, I don't know of too many operating systems where the source code is floating around. I mean so what if it doesn't come with a pretty shrink wrapped package and a thick getting-started, if you have a question just go find the source code. Geez.
There are some communities of software developers that have this strange belief that program behavior should conform to user expectations instead of the user conforming to the program behavior. Your other remarks are rational, relevant, appropriate, and correct, but this remark illustrates magnificently why unix is still user hostile after all these years. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.catalog.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. | jamesd@netcom.com
On Sun, 29 Jan 1995, James A. Donald wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jan 1995, Joe Turner wrote:
Additionally, I don't know of too many operating systems where the source code is floating around. I mean so what if it doesn't come with a pretty shrink wrapped package and a thick getting-started, if you have a question just go find the source code. Geez.
There are some communities of software developers that have this strange belief that program behavior should conform to user expectations instead of the user conforming to the program behavior.
Your other remarks are rational, relevant, appropriate, and correct, but this remark illustrates magnificently why unix is still user hostile after all these years.
UNIX? user hostile? where have you been lately? ever hear of X windows? Indigo Magic Desktop? these and zillions of other innovations have made UNIX more user-friendly than any other operating system I have used (which includes DOS, Windows, OS/2, and NeXTstep, among others). The only real barrier left to UNIX becoming the OS of choice is commercial app support (things like word processors and etc. becoming readily available and inexpensive). Bryan Venable | c642011@cclabs.missouri.edu Student & MOO Administrator | wlspif@showme.missouri.edu U of Missouri - Columbia | spif@pobox.com SGI/Netscape/MOO addict | spif@m-net.arbornet.org Spif or Turmandir @ MOOs | http://www.phlab.missouri.edu/~c642011 <insert standard university disclaimer here>
On Sun, 29 Jan 1995, Spif wrote:
UNIX? user hostile? where have you been lately? ever hear of X windows? Indigo Magic Desktop? these and zillions of other innovations have made UNIX more user-friendly than any other operating system I have used (which includes DOS, Windows, OS/2, and NeXTstep, among others).
Sorry, I need to disagree here. The first time I tried to configure X for my Linux system, it barfed. It also spewed on several subsequent attempts, and this is with pretty standard hardware. I finally found an X guru locally and he fixed it for me. At the very least, Windoze and OS/2 and NeXT give you graphics out of the box, with no need to spend several hours configuring it just to get basics up, and no need to try to find some kind of user-oriented documentation to guide you through these hassles. Now, I like Linux/Unix a lot. It is really one of the better OSes out there, but it isn't very friendly for the person that doesn't know what they are doing, especially to configure basic apps.
The only real barrier left to UNIX becoming the OS of choice is commercial app support (things like word processors and etc. becoming readily available and inexpensive).
I agree. If I could get a WYSIWYG word processor for X that was as robuse as MS Word or Wordperfect, I'd be a very camper. ____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@krypton.mankato.msus.edu \ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=- \/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> I am Pentium of Borg \/ Finger for PGP Public Key <=> you will be approximated
On Sun, 29 Jan 1995, Robert A. Hayden wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 1995, Spif wrote:
UNIX? user hostile? where have you been lately? ever hear of X windows? Indigo Magic Desktop? these and zillions of other innovations have made UNIX more user-friendly than any other operating system I have used (which includes DOS, Windows, OS/2, and NeXTstep, among others).
Sorry, I need to disagree here. The first time I tried to configure X for my Linux system, it barfed. It also spewed on several subsequent attempts, and this is with pretty standard hardware. I finally found an X guru locally and he fixed it for me. At the very least, Windoze and OS/2 and NeXT give you graphics out of the box, with no need to spend several hours configuring it just to get basics up, and no need to try to find some kind of user-oriented documentation to guide you through these hassles.
XFree86 was a snap to set up on my system, and I'm no guru. In addition, Linux does not occupy the entirety of the UNIX spectrum - SGI systems, for example, give you graphics "out of the box", and so do many other workstation systems. Granted, such machines are more expensive, but then we're talking about ease-of-use and power here, not cost.
Now, I like Linux/Unix a lot. It is really one of the better OSes out there, but it isn't very friendly for the person that doesn't know what they are doing, especially to configure basic apps.
I'm not a UNIX guru, as I said, although I do have some basic UNIX knowledge. Slackware was, for me, one of the easiest installations I have ever done on any computer. It was a breeze.
The only real barrier left to UNIX becoming the OS of choice is commercial app support (things like word processors and etc. becoming readily available and inexpensive).
I agree. If I could get a WYSIWYG word processor for X that was as robuse as MS Word or Wordperfect, I'd be a very camper.
in fact, there are version of Wordperfect (and perhaps MS Word as well) for UNIX systems... they're just more expensive and less immediately available in the marketplace. Bryan Venable | c642011@cclabs.missouri.edu Student & MOO Administrator | wlspif@showme.missouri.edu U of Missouri - Columbia | spif@pobox.com SGI/Netscape/MOO addict | spif@m-net.arbornet.org Spif or Turmandir @ MOOs | http://www.phlab.missouri.edu/~c642011 <insert standard university disclaimer here>
The only real barrier left to UNIX becoming the OS of choice is commercial app support (things like word processors and etc. becoming readily available and inexpensive).
I agree. If I could get a WYSIWYG word processor for X that was as robuse as MS Word or Wordperfect, I'd be a very camper.
You can. Wordperfect comes in X flavors. Be a happy camper.
On Sat, 28 Jan 1995, Joe Turner wrote:
I mean so what if it doesn't come with a pretty shrink wrapped package and a thick getting-started, if you have a question just go find the source code. Geez.
The above appears to have been written with the complete seriousness and genuine sincerity that is usual among unix fans. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.catalog.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. | jamesd@netcom.com
participants (6)
-
Craig A. Johnston -
James A. Donald -
Joe Turner -
Perry E. Metzger -
Robert A. Hayden -
Spif