From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: os/2 bigot meets nt
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Distribution: comp
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 17:10:52 GMT

In <1992Dec26.184750.17078@grebyn.com> mfraioli@grebyn.com (Marc Fraioli) writes:

>NT is being designed to meet Government Orange Book criteria for a C2
>system.  However, that is a *long* way from actually being certified by
>the Government as "officially" C2.  Many purchasers won't care whether
>or not it is an "official" C2, I suppose, but the Government itself
>does.  Further, it is, of course, mostly the Defense Department within
>the govt that is pushing higher security, and C2 is only a short-term
>solution.  Several Unix vendors are preparing B-level OSes, and that's
>what DoD really wants in the end.

Well, not quite true.  What DoD really wants in the end is for people
to use the appropriate level of system for the appropriate level of
processing.  What level of security you need (C, B, etc.) depends
quite heavily on just what data is on the system and what it is used
for, as well as things like physical accessibility (a single-user
isolated system kept in a locked room with a guard on the door and
alarms is a pretty secure critter, after all).

>>-> 2) Cross Platform - Wouldn't it be nice to be able to sit in front of
>>-> either a PC, MIPS, Alpha, or almost any other system (Thanks HAL )
>>-> and know that Windows NT has the ability to run on it?  I know thats
>>-> a BIG Plus for some of the larger mixed - environment workplaces.
>>
>>How many people have even seen an Alpha?  The Intel world is where
>>it's at.
>>
>I'd dump my Intel PC for an Alpha in a second if I could afford it.  

So would I, but I'd want to be able to run all the DOS and Windows
stuff that's out there, as well as all the UNIX and X stuff.  Sounds
more like what I'd need on an Alpha is UNIX/X with emulation than NT.
Other than that, this 'cross-platform' hype is exactly that -- hype.
UNIX is already better in that kind of heterogenous environment than
NT will be, and runs on a wider variety of platforms.

>>-> 3) Win32s - What more to say?
>>

Well, some reason why I should care would be nice.  :-)

>>-> 4) Multiuser support - Albeit, not so great as some variants of UN*X,
>>-> but it's a lot better than what OS/2 offers 'out of the box'.

Yeah, but to get real multi-user support you have to add software for
the various rlogin and telnetd stuff.  In other words, to get
multi-user access you have to add software -- just like OS/2.

>>
>>Just like the Alpha....How many multi-CPU boxes do you see out there?
>>The intel x86 market is the only one that counts, and cross platform
>>compatibility isn't going to make a product succeed.  I'm sure
>>having a Mac version available sells a few more copies of certain
>>Windows apps (like in workplaces with PC's and Macs), but nothing
>>to write home about and Macs far outnumber multi-CPU boxes.

>Well, he said multi-user, not multi-processor.  However, NT's MP is more
>likely to be real than it's supposed multi-user features.  The "is NT
>multi-user?" thread has been beaten to death here before, so I won't
>start it up again.  Still, while we're talking about MP, I think support
>for it is a "good thing", because I suspect that with time we will see
>more such machines, but at the moment, I have no need for it.  The
>fundamental thing is, if I were shelling out the kind of $$ it would
>take to get me a fast RISC MP machine, like say a four-processor Alpha,
>I'd want to run something cool like OSF/1-- why waste all that hardware
>on Windows?  It just seems like a truly weird idea.  Remember that the
>buyers of such high-end hardware are *not* secretaries-- they are
>scientists and engineers, and they have a little more sense and
>technical awareness than the average PC user.

MP is (maybe) something for the future.  I'm not sure that hyping it
now is anything other than marketroid dreck, though.  How many of us
have multi-processor systems on our desks?

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.