From: nectar@world.std.com (Jacques A Vidrine)
Subject: Re: Tidbits 01/27/93
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 19:05:39 GMT

rs@cmie.ernet.in (Rajappa Iyer) writes:

>In article <1993Jan28.000203.26924@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:

>> [ Stuff about John Gilmore of Cygnus Support advocating that Novell
>>   make Unix source code freely available and make money by charging
>>   for support. ]

>>   Gilmore clearly has never read a Novell license if he thinks that
>>   it is even a remote possibility that his advice will be taken. And
>>   apparently he does not understand the large number of features
>>   missing in the Unix environment that are standardly available in
>>   the PC world.  Nor does he seem to have any idea of the numbers
>>   and kinds of applications available on PCs that make the kinds of
>>   "free" software he supports so strongly look like toys.  (Really,
>>   only in the area of developer tools does "free" software even come
>>   close to the quality of software available in the PC world.  Even
>>   in this area, there is much better available, though you do have
>>   the disadvantage of having to pay for it.  However, for the average
>>   user, there is almost no "free" software available).

>As someone who has used both PC software and "free" software for
>developers extensively I have to say that the above is, to put it
>mildly, the purest of drivel.  Brian, I strongly suggest you have a
>look at the kind of code that GCC (for example) generates and square
>it off against *any* PC compiler of your choice. Take a look at emacs
>and tell me how *any* PC editor of your choice stacks up against it.
>Look at flex, bison etc. and tell me about the competition. Look at
>the brain-dead (for most part) Make's available with PC compilers and
>compare them with the "free" Make's extant.

>The quality of "free" software is various, no doubt, but the best of
>them are less buggy and more featured than their commercial
>counterparts.

>As far as applications go, the quality of PC (MS-DOS or equivalent)
>applications leave much to be desired, IMHO. Most of them are fighting
>hard against RAM cram and trying to do things which MS-DOS never
>intended to let them do. The result: conflicting TSRs, memory
>management schemes, networking products etc. Are you seriously
>suggesting that Unix applications are less powerful? Perhaps you'd
>care to tell me what application domain you are considering?

I would guess that the application domain in question are general
office applications, such as spreadsheets, word processors, electronic
mail, presentation programs, project managers, personal information
managers, desktop publishing, and database applications 
(I probably missed some).  In all of these fields with the possible 
exception of database applications, the PC/Mac word excels anything 
available in the Unix world.  Try comparing Excel to Wingz, for example.
Or WordPerfect for Windows to WordPerfect for Unix. 

There are more networked PC/Macs in the world than networked Unix
machines.  What does that tell you about networking on PCs?  For instance,
my PC runs Windows for Workgroups, Netware, TCP/IP, and APPC all over
Token Ring concurrently.

With Windows NT and OS/2 TSRs and segmented memory will soon be a thing
of the past.  Not that these faults have kept developers away from
the PC/Mac platform at all.

>>   Now picture Ray Noorda's face when he realizes that not only is
>>   Gilmore quite serious about what he said, but that he [Noorda] has
>>   inherited an OS where a significant and influenential minority of
>>   the end-user community hold such views. Imagine Novell resellers
>>   coping with such people.

>Note that not everyone wants apps for free. From your note, it does
>not appear the Gilmore suggested that Novell distribute the sources to
>it's apps free. If the "bare bones" OS is available free, then it is
>up to the user to decide which apps they wish to buy and which they
>don't. The only question is where do you draw the line and define what
>constitutes the "bare bones" OS.


Bull, I want apps for free. Everyone wants apps for free. It just doesn't
happen that way.  Maybe one day (dog bless you, RMS).

>-- 
>Rajappa Iyer			rs@cmie.ernet.in (Preferred)
>				riyer@shakti.ncst.ernet.in
-- 
Jacques A. Vidrine...	   |
nectar@world.std.com	   | What man has made,
			   | man can destroy.
			   |