🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.arch
Article #10772

Re: Comparison of Alpha, MIPS and PA-RISC-II wanted

#10772
From: Robin Fairbairns
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 14:05
52 lines
3068 bytes
In article <mwp.724991851@iconix.oz.au>, mwp@iconix.oz.au (Michael
Paddon) writes (in a rather tetchy, but pretty well-informed post):
|> [...]
|> >	3) No standardized user firendly shell.
|> 
|> Last time I looked POSIX had standardized at least one of the Unix shells.
|> You can move to any modern Unix, and be able to use your favorite shell.
|> 
|> In comparison, VMS provides DCL. A language with 60's control structures
|> (no for loops, while loops etc). No pipes. No command output substitution.

True, all true.  VMS enthusiast though I am, I have to agree here.

|> No globbing, so that's its done different by every command. God save us!

Indeed no globbing (in the Un*x sense).  RMS (or is it the underlying
ACP? - I don't have direct access to VMS systems any more, boo hoo)
provide wildcard searching to every application.  An application that
rolls its own is distinctly out of order here...

There are advantages to the Un*x globbing mechanism, but on the whole
I prefer the VMS way.

|> [...]
|> 
|> After using both, I found that I produce code up to 10 times faster under
|> Unix. Which is superior?

Depends what you want it for.  For me now, using a Un*x platform to
support research into other OSs is fine.  In my previous job,
developing applications to _sell_, I appreciated what I perceived as
the solid base that VMS offered.

|> >If UNIX was ever allowed to become the sole O/S it would halt O/S deelopment
|> >completely. The only effort UNIX has ever made is in catching up.
|> 
|> There should never be a sole OS. That way lies stagnation. However Unix
|> has broken ground in some extremely important areas; examples are easy to
|> find, for instance the BSD networking development.
|> 
|> The most important point, however, is that Unix is *not* perfect. The
|> problem with commercialization is that is becomes harder and harder to
|> throw away old ideas, because code must be supported.
|> 
|> So Unix grows crusty with age, and thereby creates room for a newcomer.
|> What will it be? That's the real question.

If anyone comes up with the real answer any time soon, let me know...
--
Robin (Campaign for Real Radio 3) Fairbairns       rf@cl.cam.ac.uk
U of Cambridge Computer Lab, Pembroke St, Cambridge  CB2 3QG, UK
"They had twelve years to lay in wait for us" - Bush supporter on Nov 4
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1992Dec22.140543.23576@infodev.cam.ac.uk>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!pipex!bnr.co.uk!uknet!pavo.csi.cam.ac.uk!rf
References: <9211241336.AA22289@menora.weizmann.ac.il> <1992Nov25.131105.4955@cc.ic.ac.uk> <FRANL.92Nov25233757@draco.centerline.com> <0f=Q_u600WBO40k2xV@andrew.cmu.edu> <BzGn32.37C@dscomsa.desy.de> <mwp.724991851@iconix.oz.au>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!pipex!bnr.co.uk!uknet!pavo.csi.cam.ac.uk!rf
From: rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.sys.dec,comp.sys.sgi,comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: Comparison of Alpha, MIPS and PA-RISC-II wanted
Message-ID: <1992Dec22.140543.23576@infodev.cam.ac.uk>
Date: 22 Dec 92 14:05:43 GMT
References: <9211241336.AA22289@menora.weizmann.ac.il> <1992Nov25.131105.4955@cc.ic.ac.uk> <FRANL.92Nov25233757@draco.centerline.com> <0f=Q_u600WBO40k2xV@andrew.cmu.edu> <BzGn32.37C@dscomsa.desy.de> <mwp.724991851@iconix.oz.au>
Sender: news@infodev.cam.ac.uk (USENET news)
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK
Lines: 52
Nntp-Posting-Host: lelaps.cl.cam.ac.uk