THE MYTHS OF UNIX



IS UNIX REALLY THAT BAD?  IF NOT, THEN WHY IS IT SO SUCCESSFUL?



REPRINTED FROM THE FOURGEN UNIX JOURNAL



     FOR YEARS NOW, WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF CRITICISM OF UNIX.  WE'VE HEARD THAT

IT'S NON-STANDARD.  IT'S TOO SLOW.  IT'S TOO HARD TO USE.  THERE ARE NO

APPLICATIONS THAT RUN UNDER IT.  IT WILL BE REPLACED BY PICK, VM, CONCURRENT

DOS, OS/2, NETWORKS.  THE LIST GOES ON AND ON.

     MEANWHILE, EVERY MAJOR COMPUTER MANUFACTURER HAS BEEN RELEASING NEW

MACHINES THAT RUN UNDER UNIX.  SEVERAL COMPANIES HAVE CONVERTED THEIR ENTIRE

COMPUTER LINE OVER TO UNIX-BASED HARDWARE.  SOFTWARE COMPANIES THAT SELL UNIX

PRODUCTS ARE AMONG THE FASTEST GROWING IN THE SOFTWARE INDUSTRY.  MORE AND MORE

MAJOR SOFTWARE MAKERS ARE RELEASING UNIX VERSIONS OF THEIR POPULAR PRODUCTS.

ACCORDING TO HARDWARE MANUFACTURERS, 15% OR MORE OF ALL NEW 386 SYSTEMS ARE

BEING SOLD TO SUPPORT UNIX OR XENIX.

     IF THE CRITICS ARE CORRECT, THE MARKET MUST BE CRAZY.  THE DISPARITY

BETWEEN WHAT WE'VE HEARD ABOUT UNIX AND WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE MARKETPLACE

SHOULD MAKE US WONDER.  IF UNIX IS SO BAD, WHY IS IT SO SUCCESSFUL?  OR, TO

TAKE IT FROM ANOTHER ANGLE, WHY HAS UNIX BEEN SO MALIGNED DESPITE ITS

ACCEPTANCE IN THE MARKETPLACE?



WHY CRITICISM ABOUNDS



     FIRST, LET ME MAKE MY POSITION CLEAR.  MOST OF THE CRITICISM THAT'S HEARD

ABOUT UNIX IS SIMPLY INCORRECT.  IT IS IGNORANCE PASSING AS INFORMATION.  IN

THIS ARTICLE WE SHALL DISCUSS MANY OF THESE POPULAR MYTHS ABOUT UNIX, BUT FIRST

LET US CONSIDER WHY CRITICISM IS SO PLENTIFUL.

     I GROUP UNIX CRITICS INTO THREE DIFFERENCE CATEGORIES.

     FIRST, THERE ARE THE EXPERTS WHO ARE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH ANYTHING OUTSIDE

THEIR EXPERTISE.  WHEN THIS TYPE OF PERSON ENCOUNTERS A NEW ENVIRONMENT, THEIR

NATURAL TENDENCY IS TO LOOK FOR ITS FLAWS.  SINCE SO MANY OF TODAY'S "EXPERTS"

GREW UP IN THE SINGLE-USER MS-DOS WORLD, THEY HAVE LITTLE EXPERIENCE WITH THE

TYPE OF ENVIRONMENT REPRESENTED BY UNIX.  WHEN THEY ARE EXPOSED TO IT, THEY ARE

INTIMIDATED AND, THEREFORE, CRITICAL.

     NEXT, WE HAVE COMPETITORS.  THESE CRITICS ARE SELLING PRODUCTS THAT

COMPETE WITH UNIX AND THEY ARE GOING TO FOCUS THE DEBATE ON THE WEAKNESSES OF

THEIR COMPETITION.  SINCE UNIX DOESN'T HAVE AN ORGANIZED GROUP OF PROPONENTS,

ITS OPPONENTS HAVE CONTROLLED MUCH OF WHAT WE HEAR ABOUT THE OPERATING SYSTEM.

YOU CAN SAY ALMOST ANYTHING YOU WANT ABOUT UNIX AND NOT BE CHALLENGED TO

SUPPORT YOUR ACCUSATIONS.

     FINALLY, WE HAVE THE PURISTS.  THIS SPECIMEN IS AN IDEALIST FOR WHOM NO

PRODUCT IS FAST ENOUGH, EFFICIENT ENOUGH, SIMPLE ENOUGH, OR POWERFUL ENOUGH.

UNFORTUNATELY, MANY UNIX USERS THEMSELVES FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY.  IT IS

PERHAPS A COMPLIMENT THAT UNIX ATTRACTS THIS KIND OF PERSON, WHEN SO MANY UNIX

EXPERTS TALK MAINLY ABOUT ITS DEFECTS.  THE GENERAL PUBLIC CAN EASILY GET THE

WRONG IMPRESSION.

     WHAT KINDS OF THINGS ARE THESE VARIOUS GROUPS SAYING ABOUT UNIX AND WHAT

IS TRUE?



MYTH #1: THERE IS NO "STANDARD" VERSION OF UNIX.



     A STATEMENT CAN BE AT ONCE THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH AND VERY MISLEADING.  THIS

IS PERHAPS THE MOST WIDELY MISUNDERSTOOD ASPECT OF UNIX.  EVEN PEOPLE WORKING

ON UNIX SYSTEMS ARE UNDER THE GENERAL IMPRESSION THAT SOMEHOW THEIR SYSTEM IS

VERY DIFFERENT FROM OTHER PEOPLE'S UNIX SYSTEMS.  WHAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T

UNDERSTAND IS THAT FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, UNIX IS UNIX AND XENIX IS UNIX

AND A LOT OF OTHER THINGS ARE UNIX AS WELL.

     THESE VARIOUS VERSIONS OF THE OPERATING SYSTEM ARE MORE SIMILAR THAN THEY

ARE DIFFERENT.  THEY ARE, FOR EXAMPLE, MUCH MORE SIMILAR THAN 2.0 AND 3.0

MS-DOS.  THE�DIFFERENCES MIGHT BE COMPARED MORE TO THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN

PC-DOS AND MS-DOS.  SURE THERE ARE DIFFERENCES AT VARIOUS LEVELS, BUT WHO

CARES?  NON-BINARY SOFTWARE THAT RUNS ON ONE CAN RUN UNDER THE OTHER.

     THE PROBLEM WITH DEFINING A "STANDARD" UNIX IS MORE AN EMBARRASSMENT OF

RICHES THAN ANYTHING ELSE.  SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE MADE SO MANY ENHANCEMENTS TO

THEIR UNIX THAT THEY SERVE TO EXPAND THE DEFINITION OF UNIX RATHER THAN REFINE

IT.  UNIX ALSO RUNS ON A VARIETY OF PROCESSORS AND, AS IS ALWAYS THE CASE WHEN

YOU PORT OVER VARIOUS PROCESSORS, PROGRAMS HAVE TO BE RECOMPILED TO RUN, BUT

THIS ISN'T THE FAULT OF UNIX, IT'S THE NATURE OF REALITY.  WE'VE MADE HUNDREDS

OF UNIX PORTS AND, COMPARED TO PORTS BETWEEN OTHER OPERATING SYSTEMS, IT'S A

SNAP.



MYTH #2: UNIX IS SLOW.



     THE QUESTION HERE IS NOT REALLY IS UNIX TOO SLOW.  EVERYTHING IS TOO SLOW.

THE QUESTION IS HOW DOES IT COMPARE WITH OTHER OPERATING SYSTEMS.  NO ONE

CLAIMS THAT MS-DOS IS TOO SLOW, BUT UNIX (IN THE GUISE OF SCO XENIX) RUNS MANY

TIMES FASTER ON THE SAME BOX THAN DOES MS-DOS.  IN PERFORMING ANY "OPERATING

SYSTEM" INTENSIVE TASK SUCH AS DISK ACCESS OR SERIAL OUTPUT, MS-DOS RANGES FROM

TWO TO TEN TIMES SLOWER IN BENCHMARKS AGAINST XENIX.  THE MORE DISK ACCESS THE

WORSE MS-DOS PERFORMS BY COMPARISON SIMPLY BECAUSE, UNLIKE CALCULATIONS, DISK

ACCESS IS CONTROLLED PRIMARILY BY THE OPERATING SYSTEM.

     WHEN WE COMPARE UNIX TO OS/2 FOR SUPPORT OF MULTIPLE SIMULTANEOUS

PROCESSES, RECENT TESTS HAVE SHOWN THAT, ON THE SAME HARDWARE, OS/2 STARTS OUT

ABOUT THE SAME SPEED, BUT THEN DEGRADES AS MORE PROCESSES ARE ADDED ABOUT TEN

TIMES FASTER THAN THE UNIX MACHINE.  OS/2 USING THE SAME BASIC DISK

ORGANIZATION AS MS-DOS HAS THE SAME PROBLEMS WITH SLOW DISK ACCESS.  ARE THERE

FASTER OPERATING SYSTEMS?  FOR DOING CERTAIN THINGS, CERTAINLY.  THIS IS

ESPECIALLY TRUE OF OPERATING SYSTEMS THAT HAVE BEEN OPTIMIZED (AS YOU WOULD

EXPECT MS-DOS TO BE) FOR ONE SPECIFIC TYPE OF HARDWARE.  ARE THERE ANY

OPERATING SYSTEMS THAT RUN ON AS WIDE A VARIETY OF HARDWARE THAT ARE FASTER?

NO.



MYTH #3: UNIX IS TOO HARD TO USE.



     ONCE MORE, EVERYTHING IS TOO HARD TO USE, BUT IF WE COMPARE UNIX WITH

MS-DOS, WE DISCOVER THAT, FOR DOING SIMILAR TASKS -- CREATING DIRECTORIES,

COPYING AND MOVING FILES, AND OTHER COMMON HOUSEKEEPING TASKS -- UNIX COMMANDS

ARE NO MORE DIFFICULT THAN THEIR MS-DOS COUNTERPARTS.  BOTH SYSTEMS REQUIRE

THAT YOU MEMORIZE THE COMMANDS AND THEIR SYNTAX.  THIS IS A PRETTY COMPLICATED

FORM OF OPERATING SYSTEM CONTROL, BUT, IF YOU WANT SOMETHING EASIER, YOU CAN BY

AN EASY-TO-USE "SHELL" FOR EITHER SYSTEM THAT PROMPTS YOU THROUGH ALL THE

COMMANDS.

     THE PROBLEM WITH UNIX IS NOT THAT IT IS HARDER THAN MS-DOS, BUT THAT IT IS

SO MUCH MORE POWERFUL.  WHERE MS-DOS HAS A COUPLE OF DOZEN DIFFERENT THINGS YOU

CAN DO AT THE OPERATING SYSTEM LEVEL, UNIX PROVIDES HUNDREDS.  THE DEPTH AND

POWER OF UNIX IS VERY INTIMIDATING, BUT YOU MUST REMEMBER THAT YOU AREN'T

REQUIRED TO KNOW IT ALL TO USE THE SYSTEM.  YOU USE WHAT YOU KNOW AND EXPAND ON

YOUR KNOWLEDGE ON AN ON-GOING BASIS.  NO ONE EVER FINISHES LEARNING UNIX.  UNIX

UTILITIES SUCH AS THE VISUAL EDITOR "VI" ARE SO POWERFUL THAT YOU CAN STILL BE

LEARNING NEW FEATURES AFTER YOU HAVE BEEN USING THE PRODUCT FOR YEARS.

     THE OPERATING SYSTEM DEPTH AND POWER IS ONE OF THE REASONS UNIX IS SO

POPULAR.  ALL OF THE HUNDREDS, PERHAPS THOUSANDS, OF FUNCTIONS YOU FIND ONLY ON

A UNIX SYSTEM ARE ALL OF THE THINGS THAT USERS OF A SOPHISTICATED COMPUTER WANT

TO USE AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER.  THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT ON UNIX, THESE FUNCTIONS

ARE ALREADY AVAILABLE.  YOU DON'T HAVE TO FIND, BUY OR WRITE THEM.  YOU JUST

HAVE TO LEARN THEM.



MYTH #4: THERE ARE NO APPLICATIONS FOR UNIX.



     THIS IS PERHAPS THE STRANGEST CLAIM OF ALL, SINCE THE REASON THAT MOST

COMPUTER MANUFACTURERS BUILD UNIX MACHINES IS BECAUSE THERE *ARE* SO MANY

APPLICATIONS AVAILABLE.  AS THE FIRST OPERATING SYSTEM THAT SPANS ALL TYPES OF

HARDWARE, FROM MICRO-COMPUTERS TO SUPER COMPUTERS, THE APPLICATION BASE FOR

UNIX IS UNRIVALED IN THE COMPUTER WORLD EXCEPT FOR THOSE APPLICATIONS WRITTEN

FOR MS-DOS.

     THERE ARE CERTAINLY MORE APPLICATIONS WRITTEN FOR MS-DOS THAN THERE ARE

APPLICATIONS WRITTEN FOR UNIX.  BUT FOR MULTI-USER, MULTI-TASKING SYSTEMS UNIX

IS UNRIVALED.  THERE IS A PROBLEM, HOWEVER, WITH APPLICATION AVAILABILITY.  IN

THE UNIX WORLD, MOST APPLICATIONS ARE NOT PACKAGED FOR RETAIL SALE.  ALMOST ALL

APPLICATIONS ARE SOLD DIRECTLY BY THE MANUFACTURER, INSTALLING IT AT USER

SITES, OR BY VARS.  SINCE THERE IS NO RETAIL MARKET FOR UNIX, THERE REALLY

HASN'T BEEN MUCH OF AN EFFORT TO COLLECT AND DISTRIBUTE UNIX APPLICATIONS IN AN

ORGANIZED FASHION.  PACKAGES ARE AVAILABLE, BUT THE MARKET FOR UNIX MUST BECOME

MORE ORGANIZED BEFORE THE HOW AND WHERE OF APPLICATION BUYING IS SIMPLIFIED.



MYTH #5: UNIX WILL BE REPLACED BY OS/2.



     WE'VE HEARD THIS OVER AND OVER:  THE NEXT "THING" IS GOING TO REPLACE

UNIX.  IT'S BEEN SAID ABOUT PICK, VM AND CONCURRENT DOS.  ALL OF THESE PRODUCTS

ARE JUST SURVIVING IN A MARKET IN WHICH UNIX IS COMING TO DOMINATE.  NOW IT'S

OS/2'S TURN.

     FIRST, UNIX, AS AN OPERATING SYSTEM STANDARD, CAN'T BE REPLACED BY ANY ONE

OPERATING SYSTEM.  THIS IS BECAUSE NO OPERATING SYSTEM IS AVAILABLE ON THE

RANGE OF MACHINES ON WHICH UNIX IS OFFERED.  ONLY PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING

EXCLUSIVELY AT THE INTEL MICRO-COMPUTER WORLD FORSEE SOME KIND OF DOMINANCE BY

OS/2.  [I DOUBT THAT YOU'LL SEE OS/2 ON THE CRAY 2 -- UNIX, UNDER THE NAME OF

UNICOS IS ALREADY OPERATING NICELY THERE. -ED.]

     EVEN IF YOU LOOK AT JUST MICRO-COMPUTERS, THE IDEA THAT OS/2 IS GOING TO

OUTMODE UNIX IS CLEARLY A FANTASY.  OS/2 IS A SINGLE USER OPERATING SYSTEM.

UNIX IS A MULTI-USER OPERATING SYSTEM.  AS LONG AS THERE IS A DEMAND FOR

MULTI-USER SYSTEMS -- AND THAT DEMAND IS DRAMATICALLY INCREASING AS NEW

PROCESSORS MAKE MULTI-USER SYSTEM MORE AFFORDABLE -- UNIX HAS A MARKET.

MICROSOFT, THE MAKERS OF OS/2, HAVE SAID OVER AND OVER THAT OS/2 WILL NEVER BE

A MULTI-USER OPERATING SYSTEM.  OS/2 MACHINES CAN BE LINKED INTO NETWORKS, BUT

DON'T SUPPORT MULTIPLE USERS ON A SINGLE PROCESSOR.



MYTH #6: UNIX WILL BE REPLACED BY NETWORKS.



UNIX DOESN'T COMPETE WITH NETWORKS, IT SUPPORTS THEM.  NETWORKS ARE GOING TO

BECOME MORE POPULAR.  UNIX-BASED NETWORKS ARE GOING TO BECOME EVEN MORE POPULAR

BECAUSE THEY SUPPORT ALL TYPES OF VERY DIFFERENT SYSTEMS.  NOTHING OFFERS THE

RANGE OF COMMUNICATION AND NETWORKING FEATURES THAT UNIX DOES, AND BECAUSE OF

THAT, WE EXPECT TO SEE THE NETWORK MARKET BECOME MORE AND MORE DOMINATED BY

UNIX-BASED SYSTEMS.

     DOES THIS MEAN THE MAIN USE OF UNIX IN THE MICRO-COMPUTER WORLD WILL BE AS

A FILE SERVER?  CERTAINLY NOT.  BECAUSE OF ECONOMIC FACTORS, THE MARKET FOR

UNIX MULTI-USER SYSTEMS WHERE USERS WORK AT INEXPENSIVE DUMB TERMINALS WILL

CONTINUE TO GROW FASTER THAN THE GENERAL MARKET.  FOR SUPPORTING MULTIPLE USERS

IN A WORK ENVIRONMENT, NETWORKS ARE TWO TO THREE TIMES MORE EXPENSIVE THAN A

UNIX-BASED SYSTEM.  PERHAPS THE COST FACTOR IS UNIMPORTANT TO A CERTAIN

PERCENTAGE OF COMPUTER PURCHASERS, BUT THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF

POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS WHO CAN'T AFFORD A MULTI-USER SYSTEM AT THAT PRICE.  THESE

CUSTOMERS HAVE BOUGHT AND WILL CONTINUE TO BY UNIX-BASED SYSTEMS.



WHY UNIX?



     WHY DOES UNIX CONTINUE TO PROSPER?  IT IS THE ONLY STANDARD FOR MULTI-USER

SYSTEMS.  FOR APPLICATIONS DEVELOPERS WHO WANT TO DEVELOP MULTI-USER PROGRAMS,

IT IS THE ONE PLATFORM FOR WHICH THEY CAN DEVELOP SOFTWARE AND BE ASSURED THAT

THAT SOFTWARE WILL RUN ON A WIDE VARIETY OF MACHINES.  IT GIVES HARDWARE

DEVELOPERS AN EXISTING BASE OF APPLICATIONS FOR NEW MACHINES.  IT GIVES

SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS INDEPENDENCE FROM ANY ONE MACHINE OR MANUFACTURER.



RECOGNIZING THIS, BOTH HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS ARE TURNING TOWARD UNIX

AS THEIR FUTURE.

     COMPARED WITH MS-DOS AND OS/2, ITS SINGLE-USER COUSINS, UNIX IS FASTER AND

INFINITELY MORE POWERFUL.  AS THE POPULARITY OF UNIX-BASED NETWORKS GROWS, WE

EXPECT THAT MORE AND MORE DOS USERS WILL DISCOVER THE MANY BENEFITS OF USING

UNIX.  AS PEOPLE TURN MORE TOWARD MULTI-USER INSTALLATIONS, COST FACTORS WILL

ALSO CONTINUE TO INCREASE THE DISTRIBUTION OF UNIX-BASED SYSTEMS.

     FINALLY, AS HARDWARE TECHNOLOGY MOVE FORWARD, COMPUTER MANUFACTURERS HAVE

A SIMPLE CHOICE:  DO THEY DEVELOP A NEW OPERATING SYSTEM FOR EACH NEW HARDWARE

TECHNOLOGY OR DO THEY UTILIZE UNIX?  DEVELOPING A NEW OPERATING SYSTEM CAN COST

MILLIONS AND TAKE YEARS.  AFTER DEVELOPING ANY NEW OPERATING SYSTEM, THERE ARE

NO APPLICATIONS THAT RUN ON IT.  IN COMPARISON, UNIX IS READY NOW AND THE OEM

LICENSE COSTS A SMALL FRACTION OF WHAT IS WOULD COST TO DEVELOP A NEW OPERATING

SYSTEM.  AS A BONUS, WHEN YOU USE UNIX YOU INHERIT A LARGE BASE OF ALREADY

WRITTEN APPLICATIONS.  IF YOU WERE RUNNING A COMPUTER COMPANY, WHICH ROUTE

WOULD YOU CHOOSE?  YOU CAN TEST YOUR GUESS AGAINST THE MARKETPLACE.  MOTOROLA

JUST RELEASED A NEW PROCESSOR CHIP SET CALLED THE 88000.  HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT

TO BET THAT UNIX IS THE FIRST OPERATING SYSTEM OFFERED FOR FOR THE COMPUTER

USING THIS CHIP?  SINCE NEW HARDWARE IS INEVITABLE, UNIX IS INEVITABLE.

     DESPITE WHAT YOU MAY HAVE HEARD, UNIX IS THE FUTURE.









X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X



 Another file downloaded from:                               NIRVANAnet(tm)



 & the Temple of the Screaming Electron   Jeff Hunter          510-935-5845

 Rat Head                                 Ratsnatcher          510-524-3649

 Burn This Flag                           Zardoz               408-363-9766

 realitycheck                             Poindexter Fortran   415-567-7043

 Lies Unlimited                           Mick Freen           415-583-4102



   Specializing in conversations, obscure information, high explosives,

       arcane knowledge, political extremism, diversive sexuality,

       insane speculation, and wild rumours. ALL-TEXT BBS SYSTEMS.



  Full access for first-time callers.  We don't want to know who you are,

   where you live, or what your phone number is. We are not Big Brother.



                          "Raw Data for Raw Nerves"



X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X