From: brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill)
Subject: Re: is NT really NEW technology?
Date: 19 Aug 92 17:20:59 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

In article <1992Aug19.095521.3609@desire.wright.edu> jstewart@desire.wright.edu writes:
>>>Yeah, whats the "alot more?".  
>> 
>> Over X:
>
>	But not having X compatability is a big DISADVANTAGE.  Is it going to
>have it's own X type windowing system.
X will of course be there for those few that need the networked display
abilities. Why you would want to take the performance normally, mystifies me.

>
>> 	Speed.
>> 	Size.
>
>	NT does not look tiny at this point and it's only getting bigger.
I was referring to the size of the working set necessary
to
>
>> 	Ability to list fonts.
>> 	Printer support.
>> 	Multimedia support.
>
>	What is multi-media stick figures and beeps?  When I see a standard
>supporting a realistic system then I'll jump on the MM bandwagon.
Your problem if you can't see neat things in what is there.  These sorts
of features are largely what kept Macintoshes selling in the last few years.

>
>> 	Pen support.
>	I'll tell you this is important to me, really important
>	(can't you smell the sarcasm).
I wouldn't mind having an 8 1/2 by 11 "screen" I carry around with me and
"write" to, that's running NT.  It's probably not that long before
planes have networking built-in... imagine doing client/server stuff from
you pen based system to you machine back at home/work.  NT is designed
for the future, and 2 years from now this may not be a fantasy.
In truth you can do it now.. as some planes already have cellular phones
on board, and they have modem jacks.

>
>> 	Source and binary compatiblity with a GUI currently in the
>> 		hands of a horde that even the most skeptical
>> 		number at 4,000,000. (Win32s)
>	When I see either I'll believe it, from what I understand it is 
>neither now.
When 3.1 came out the typedefs necessary were already in place. What isn't
out yet is the DLL and VDD necessary to run 32 bit programs under Windows 3.X.
(I.E. source compatibility is already possible, binary compatibility is due
out in September.)

>
>> 	OLE
>> 	Scripted GUI testing program.
>> 
>> Over most X:
>> 	Scalable fonts.
>> 	A single defined user interface (i.e. no Motif/OpenLook wars).
>
>	I like diversity, I the user can pick my favorite, and the app designer
>can pick whichever one is more appropriate to their app.
Fine... enjoy.

>
>> 	Fast hyper-text help system.
>
>	Quite a few Unix's now have CD-ROM based full Doc sets not just 
>dimpy help files.
Can you write your own additions to this set?

>> 
>> 
>> Over Unix:
>> 	Ability to fsck gigabyte volumes in a few seconds.
>
>	Have you seen this in action?
Yes, at the San Francisco NT developers conference.
>
>> 	Ability to run Windows 3.X applications.
>> 	Ability to run OS/2 1.X character mode applications.
>> 	Base package comes with C2 security.
>	
>        I attacked this previously.
Why.. I take it you don't share your computer with someone?
I think it's neat that my wife and I can have separate desktops.
Or did you mean its not C2 certified.. big deal, neither are the vast
majority of Unix systems claiming C2-level security.

>
>> 	Printer support such that the spooler understands the
>> 		capabilities of the printer.
>
>	The printcap seems to allow this, though I will admit it is 
>unfriendly.
Wrong... printcap has no idea what size paper is currently loaded, or
how to tell the printer to do manual feed.  There is no api for applications
to use, to know what fonts a printer has, etc.

>
>> 	Fully integrated internationalization abilities.
>> 	Access control lists for most system objects.
>> 	No system table limits (i.e. no limits on proc table size, etc.).
>
>	This would be interesting name your source.
Dave Cutler (NT's chief archetect), speaking at the NT developers conference.

>
>> 	Sparse address space support.
>> 	Per process control of page attributes.
>> 	Object-oriented, from scratch, design.
>
>	Then how come it comes with the pathetic win 3.x user interface, why
>don't they take advantage of the great god of object orientedness.
This is planned for '94... it's called Windows Cairo.

>
>> 	Defined E-mail API.
>	What's SMTP?
Snicker... SMTP is hack, even its orignal author blushes about it at BSD
BOF's at USENIX.  An e-mail api handles the routing issues (such as what
sendmail does), mailer agent issues (i.e. how Mail or mailx reads, locks, etc),
addressing issues such as 'real' name to address lookup (X.500).

>
>> 	Named Pipes over networks.
>
>	But does it have berkeley sockets?
Yes.

>
>> 	Common adapter interface for ethernet cards.
>> 	Dynamically loadable/unloadable file system drivers.
>> 	B-tree directory structure (large directories have fast lookup).
>
>	At the cost of compatability with the normal file system?
NTFS is it's "normal" filesystem.

>
>> 	Installation program easily licensable from the OS vendor.
>> 	Cost.
>
>	Since when do we have a final cost on NT.
They've said definitely that it will be less than $500.

>
>> 
>> Over most Unix:
>> 	Define tape API.
>> 	Asynchronous I/O.
>
>	What kind of asynchronus I/O?
Similar to that done by Berkeley Unix.

>
>> 	Dynamically loadable/unloadable device drivers.
>> 	Memory mapped files.
>> 	Ability to write platform independent device drivers.
>
>	I really want to see this one, if it's platform independant than it's
>not a device driver.
Well the device driver writer's at the conference felt that way to at
first, you should have seen the line at the microphone... but after
some Q&A they seemed convenienced.

>
>> 	Threads (and corresponding syncronization methods).
>
>	One of the few advantages I see, but then OS/2 has these.
Wow, you must be blind.

>
>> 	Adminstration easy enough for the average user to use.
>> 	MicroKernel design.
>
>	Unless we're running multiple OS servers I don't see the big advantage.
Fine, take an OS class.

>
>> 	Ability to run DOS apps.
>
>	I've always wanted to run DOS apps on my 30,000 dollar workstation, let
>me tell ya, but then I can get softpc for most of these workstations.
Fine... I personally like my games, and programs that cost less
than $200, and some of the finest software development suites for under $300.
Not that I expect I'll be running the DOS apps that long.

>
>> 	A defined interface to system statistics and quotas.
>
>	How does unix manage these w/o them being defined?
All programs that do statistics on Unix (except under SunOS, they switched
recently), open /dev/kmem and seek to data structure offsets in kernel
memory and read the bits directly, basically it means that the programs
break with every kernel release.

>
>> 	Symmetric multiprocessing.
>> 	C2 level security.
>
>	Once again, this ain't just S/W.
S/W?

>
>> 	Base package contains peer-to-peer file and printer sharing.
>
>	I don't think I've seen a unix w/o lpr.
Snicker... lpr is printer sharing?  Well for text files or if every program
you use takes the old DOS-style approach of supporting all the printers
in the world.

>
>> 	Global (i.e. combined I/O and VM) cache.
>> 	Majority of kernel code pageable.
>
>	Is it cause it has a 2 gig kernal :) :) :)
Cute... SysV does this too, so does Mach.

>
>> 	Support for PC networks such as Novell, Banyan Vines.
>> 	Remote booting.
>> 	Remote installation and maintenance.
>> 	Access Control Lists. *
>> 	Internationalization support. *
>> 
>> * Repeated from above, but in the general case.
>> 
>> If you claim that I'm wrong about the list above and want to respond
>> please restrict yourself to ONE existing, named, commercial version of
>> Unix per message.
>> 
>> Brian
>
>	I guess I'd have to say Ultrix for my "allocated" unix.
Hahaha... you kill me!!!

Brian