From: david@dynamix.com (David L Jarvis)
Subject: Re: Xenix considered harmful (was Re: SCO support - a success story)
Organization:  SOFTWARE / DYNAMIX
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 10:50:19 EDT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA06521; Sun, 6 Sep 92 08:38:57 -0700
X-Received: by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com; id AA11882; Sun, 6 Sep 92 08:38:56 -0700
X-Received: from dynamix.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet)id AA24391; Sun, 6 Sep 92 11:35:38 -0400
X-Received: by dynamix.com (smail2.5c)id AA05574; 6 Sep 92 10:50:19 EDT (Sun)
X-To: comp.unix.xenix.sco.usenet (comp.unix.xenix.sco)
X-In-Reply-To: <Btzo2C.vn@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us>; from "Marc Unangst" at Sep 3, 92 6:15 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

> So what are the "good reasons" to drop Xenix/286 support?  As far as I

How about all those segmentation violations that arose from the 286 not
having hardware memory protection?  The 286 was a bastardized 186, and both
were brain-dead.  My opinions are based on the hardware, not the OS.
But again, this is a digression.

> can tell, it's still a viable OS -- there are people out there still
> running it (I know, we have a client who is using it), and it serves
> their needs just fine.  

Wow, this is quite a contradiction to what you've been arguing ...
How can you say Xenix has no reason for existence one second and the next
say that it still serves the clients needs just fine and is a viable OS ???
Why haven't you forced this client and others like them to switch to Unix?
WOW!!!  Could it be that ... perhaps ... they don't NEED Unix???!!!  
You said it yourself Marc, Xenix serves their needs just fine, and THATS
what we've all been saying right along ...

> So why is it okay for vendors to ditch
> Xenix/286, but not okay for them to drop Xenix/386?  After all, apps

Lots of reasons ... the hardware is obsolete and flawed, and the OS
suffered many problems because of this ... but again, this digression

> >Xenix is the absolute most mature and stable product on the *nix market.  
> 
> Again, you're making these sweeping statements.  Qualify "mature" and
> "stable", please.

Show me a *nix that's been in the intel-based micro market longer - 
you can't - why? - because Xenix was the first, and I was there to witness
it's birth on the 286 (Tandy released it's version of Microsoft Xenix, and
soon thereafter SCO did as well)
So what I meant by mature and stable was that it's had more time to have
all the major problems resolved, and to become more refined ...

> >What exactly do you mean by "clean"?  
> 
> I mean that SCO Unix doesn't have ugly kludges like Xenix's
> pseudo-inittab file.  

What would inittab provide that /etc/ttys doesn't?  Under *normal*
circumstances, /etc/ttys w/ enable/disable does just fine.  

> Or Xenix's horrid V7-style kernel configuration.

Oh please ... the configure script makes this simple and painless ...
who cares what "style" configuration the system uses as long as it 
works ... I've never once had a problem configuring Xenix ...

> And ever try to get Xenix to use domain-style e-mail addresses with
> the software SCO supplies?

Nope - I've always used smail ... never had a problem with it either 
(why buy an inferior SCO product when a free on will do?)

> >Easier to administer?
> 
> Yep.  I don't have to keep two separate areas in my mind for "the way
> Xenix does things" and "the way everything else does things."  

So Unix is better than Xenix because you don't want to learn Xenix?
Sure it's different, but are all Unixes out there the same?  Hell no.
Again, our primary concern is the clients best interest ... so if Xenix is
the best solution, we provide it, and if it means that one of our systems
people have to do some relearning from SVR4 (where most of our ppl come
from) to Xenix, so be it ...

> >Nice choice of .sigs ... sounds like you're out to enlighten the entire 
> >world (and not just us unfortunates on c.u.x.sco!)  to your way of
> >thinking.
> 
> It's a JOKE, Dave.  Y'know, like, something you laugh at?  Get a clue.
> No, here, take two -- they're small.
> 
> >#  Real men don't try to tell the world what a real man does.          #
> 
> Oooh.  Why, I feel so...unMANly now.

My point was that your .sig fell right in place with what you've been
trying to tell everybody here ... "hey, real men don't use Xenix" ...    


#----------------------------------------------------------------------#
#          David L. Jarvis                 SOFTWARE  /                 #
#          david@dynamix.com                       /  DYNAMIX          #
#----------------------------------------------------------------------#