From: willmore@iastate.edu (David Willmore) Subject: Re: Intel, the Pentium and Linux Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1993 02:51:48 GMT
jerry@msi.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>Actually, I always get the latest Linux kernels, GNU utilities, XFree86 betas,
>etc. I do *not* use networking, so I can't speak for that part of the OS.
>Yes, the so-called production Unixes usually have solid networking. But,
>have you ever tried to port non-trivial software to them? No? Let me tell
>you a little story. In our efforts to port our molecular modeling software
>to AIX/6000, we have uncovered enough "full stop" AIX bugs to force IBM to
>release something like 27 patches, after which the X server still decides to
>crash every half-hour or so, usually taking the machine down with it. No two
>AIX patchlevels run our software exactly the same way. The DBX debugger
>itself crashes all the time. It got so ridiculous that we had to take our
>IBM product off the price list pending further AIX bug fixes. And please,
>don't even get me started on HP-UX.
I wouldn't consider AIX or HP-UX as typical of modern production Unixes.
I use both on a weekly basis and I haven't found either one to be very
useful. HP-UX is SYS V based and AIX is make by IBM. That should tell
the whole story right there.
>There are lots of areas where Linux kicks serious butt on everything else
>out there. Linux's C library is more robust and compatible than any I've
>seen. Nobody -- not SVR4, and not OSF/1 -- has a /proc file system as useful
>as Linux's. No 386 Unix I've seen (except maybe SCO) has hardware support in
>the same league as Linux. Linux is smaller and faster, especially under
>heavy load than any commercial PC Unix, and has a richer set of utilities
>available. The list goes on and on.
Linux doesn't run on a 200Mhz Alpha or an HP 705. Do you think that any
Linux system runs faster than either of those two machines? It's nice,
but linux is far from as full blown a Unix as many of the current production
Unixes. For example: How much memory can a Linux system support? How much
swap? How many ttys? How fast is the X performance? How stable is the X
server? Does it have a good fortran? (ok, no fortran jokes) Pascal? Lisp?
Can you buy Arc/Info for it? Any other comercial package?
Linux *systems* aren't better than comercial machines. Linux, the operating
system, compared to the other Unixes *as an operating system* is nice. Don't
expect more from it than is reasonable.
>You mention ULTRIX and dare to talk about current releases in the same
>article? :-)
The current release of ULTRIX is 4.3. Just because that is close to the
last one that's ever going to come out, well, that doesn't mean it's not
a good OS or that the machines that it runs on aren't good. It just means
that DEC is pulling another Ken Olson on us--again.
*sigh*
>For truly current releases, try DEC's OSF/1 1.2 for the Alpha and HP-UX 9.1.
>If you're truly brave, attempt to work with AIX/6000 3.2.3 for a while.
OSF/1 1.2 I have worked with. Pretty nice. HP-UX, any version, I will
forever hate. Unfair comparison for that one. :)
I'll continue to run the most current version of Linux available, even if
a new one comes out every week. That won't stop me from wanting an Alpha
box, but that has *nothing* to do with the OS. I just want an Alpha. :)
Later,
David
-- =========================================================================== willmore@iastate.edu | "Death before dishonor" | "Better dead than greek" | David Willmore | "Ever noticed how much they look like orchids? Lovely!" | ===========================================================================