Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.development:964 comp.os.coherent:10153 comp.os.msdos.programmer:23722 comp.os.os2.programmer.porting:177 comp.unix.bsd:12327 comp.unix.programmer:10727 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!convex!convex!convex!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!digex.com!digex.net!not-for-mail From: kbennett@access.digex.net (Keith R. Bennett) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development,comp.os.coherent,comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.os.os2.programmer.porting,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.programmer Subject: Need advice: Which OS to port to? Date: 27 Jul 1993 13:18:03 -0400 Organization: Express Access Online Communications USA Lines: 67 Message-ID: <233o0b$sr9@access.digex.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.net I am working on a C++ project which is currently implemented in DOS graphics mode (non-Windows). We are looking to change operating systems, mainly because of memory limitations, but also because of the convenience of multitasking. I would greatly appreciate any feedback you might have about which operating system you feel might be best suited to our situation. The following alternatives come to mind: 1) stay with DOS, but use DOS extender (no multitasking here) 2) OS/2 3) Unix/Xenix 4) Coherent 5) QNX We will most likely be running our application on a single 486 machine. Multitasking/Multiuser might be useful so that we can call into the machine to do remote diagnostics, maintenance, etc., and so that we can be doing reporting while the system is running the main application. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Factors to Consider: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The system must be reliable. The system must have a reasonably good C++ available. We need to minimize the amount of effort required to port our system. I expect a large part of this effort will be the time it will take us to familiarize ourselves with the new environment. We need to run in DOS graphics mode, and need to be able to take over the screen completely. The user interface is our own; we cannot use any OS-native user interface conventions. The OS vendor should be stable, and reasonably expected to survive beyond the end of the decade. Programming tools should be available. We may need to be able to connect the machine running this OS to networks such as Lantastic and Novell. Cost is a factor, including run time licensing. It would be nice if there were built-in garbage collection to close up gaps in the heap. The application will be running continuously for days/months at a time. Although we have made great efforts to avoid using the heap, some allocations remain. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Pls respond via email if possible, to kbennett@access.digex.net. Thank you. - Keith -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keith Bennett Bennett Business Solutions, Inc. C++/C Software Development 1605 Ingram Terrace kbennett@access.digex.net Silver Spring, MD USA 20906-5932