Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.aix:48586 comp.unix.bsd:15515 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:7678 comp.unix.solaris:28017 comp.unix.unixware:14972 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!uwm.edu!news.alpha.net!news.mathworks.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.mtholyoke.edu!nntp.et.byu.edu!news.provo.novell.com!bikini!darrend From: darrend@bikini.USG.Sandy.Novell.COM (Darren R. Davis) Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.unixware Subject: Re: Unix for PC Date: 9 Dec 1994 17:43:47 GMT Organization: Novell Inc. Lines: 192 Distribution: inet Message-ID: <3ca50k$qqt@bantu.Provo.Novell.COM> References: <3bvmo1$hgr@cascade.pnw.net> <3c0cir$5i2@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> <STEINAR.HAUG.94Dec6203939@runit.sintef.no> <D0Ex7E.2nv@ssbunews.ih.att.com> <3c4rhh$54a@bantu.Provo.Novell.COM> <rbbrownD0I2uB.HID@netcom.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: bikini.usg.sandy.novell.com WARNING PISSING MATCH TO FOLLOW! :^) In article <rbbrownD0I2uB.HID@netcom.com>, rbbrown@netcom.com (Randolph B. Brown) writes: |> Darren R. Davis (darrend@bikini.USG.Sandy.Novell.COM) wrote |> (responding to article <D0Ex7E.2nv@ssbunews.ih.att.com>, a posting by |> jack1@iexist.flw.att.com (55433-jack fijolek(hhall)), wcich was itself |> an unattributed repost: |> |> : This is a subjective statement. What criteria was used when the statement |> : the Solaris agressively persues new technologies? How about new technologies |> : such as NetWare support? How about CDE (Both Sun and Novell contribute here). |> : What aggressive technology has Sun persued that has not been persued by |> : Novell? |> |> DOE/CORBA |> Open Step |> secure RPC (used to be (in)secure, significantly better in Solaris 2) |> XTL & ISDN |> video conferencing |> multiprocessing |> multithreading applications |> multithreading kernel, including all device drivers, including STREAMS |> multithreading debugger |> NIS+ (maybe a little too agressive a pursuit, but the idea is advanced ;-) |> |> Of these, only OpenStep isn't shipping now. OOPS, I guess you said |> "pursued by Novell," didn't you? Surely you didn't mean to weasel out |> by comparing what you're developing now to what Sun has shipped for a |> couple of years? Multiprocessing and multithreading are not at all |> easy; it takes calendar time and actual running production systems to |> wring them out. I have no experience developing the other features at |> the system level, but I assume they take maturing as well. (If |> maturity wasn't an advantage, we'd all be running our |> "mission-critical" applications on Windows NT by now. And Digital's VMS |> 4 wouldn't have been better than VMS 2.) Remember Novell acquired USL. USL had been delivering MP software to NCR, ICL, Olivetti, list goes on and on, for YEARS! Do you want to argue this point? This has included threads as well. The jury is still out on some object technologies such as NeXTstep/Open Step. Though CORBA is most likely a must. Just because Sun went out and got software from NeXT means it's the right bits. Taligent is still working on their stuff. Novell is examining all the object technologies and standards, nobody stops looking at the future. |> |> Also, note I didn't say UnixWare is a subset of Solaris; I'm just |> answering the immediate question you posed. And, by the way, access to |> NetWare file and print service is not aggressive technology. Access to |> fully developed NetWare NDS might be, if it (NDS, not UnixWare access |> to it) were mature enough to use. (I assume it will take a little |> real-world time to wring out the operational problems, since the idea |> that the whole world revolves around each server is an ingrained |> NetWare concept.) |> |> [snip] |> |> : Yet another subjective statement. What criteria was used in determining |> : feature rich. What features does Solaris have that are not present in |> : UnixWare? How many features does UnixWare have the Solaris doesn't? :^) |> |> Ignoring packaging and thinking only of availability, I can think of |> very few. Perhaps you (or George, or someone who has actually done the |> analysis) would care to list them. You are right, this is a list I would like to see as well. My whole point was that I wanted an objective list. Not these blanket statments such as my X is better than your X. We need facts! |> |> : How about price? The value of UnixWare is not diminished at all if you |> : are not going to use the NetWare connectivity. UnixWare is just as capable |> : OS as is Solaris. You choose what you need. |> |> Price is where UnixWare really hurts (compared to perception), in the |> heterogeneously networked system arena. UnixWare PE is cheap enough, |> but woefully incomplete. By the time you've added SDK (for the |> utilities someone thought I could do without) and NFS (which is |> required for NIS even if you don't want NFS, which I consider a |> required base function), UnixWare PE is about the same price as |> Solaris. And the two-user Solaris is complete. Period. I still think UnixWare is cheaper. I believe that a PE and SDK from Information Foundation is about $259.00. What is the price of Solaris as I do not know. |> |> : I believe one of the VARs such as Evan can answer how resellers are better |> : suited to handle you than direct route. How about having them close at |> : hand when problems arise? Novell also provides direct support through |> : support contracts and the 1-800-NETWARE number. You decide what support |> : you need. |> |> Resellers are rarely of use in solving my problems. Sun's Catalyst has |> been. I understand Novell is trying to get a developer's program |> going, but it's not yet as well-known, active, or effective as |> Catalyst. |> |> [snip] Evan gave a good discussion on this. |> |> : Currently (And I emphasize currently) rely on third party vendors for |> : object support. We do provide a full C/C++ development environment for |> : UnixWare. Is NextStep the leading object environment? Will it be? Only |> : you can decide how important this is to you. Novell is persueing object |> : technology just like the rest of the industry. The jury is still out |> : on object technology. Some say NeXTstep, some say Taligent, some say |> : Cairo [I don't know why though :^) ]. There are many third party options |> : as well. |> |> When I develop release 7.0, I'll worry about Cairo and Taligent. |> NextStep *is* the leading environment now, because it exists, it works, |> it ships, while the others first ship is long off. In addition, I'm |> none too sure I want to wait for Novell to ship them even after they're |> out. There is reason to doubt Novell's commitment to developer tools. |> Where is AppWare? When will CDE be a standard part of UnixWare PE? |> Why doubt Novell's commitment to developer tools? This is an area I am intimately familiar with, and we are examining various options to improve our offerings. We have C and C++ for a collective price of about $175.00 (Assuming some discount on the SDK). I am curious though what developers would like. Give me your ideas and I will bring them to the meetings I participate in. Is anybody shipping all of CDE yet? We are working on it just like the rest. |> : Our network management tools are improving, after all we are the largest |> : network software company in the world. We provide many of the same |> : network tool the Solaris does. I can not say for sure though because I |> : haven't seen all the tools provided in Solaris and how they differ to UnixWare. |> |> Nothing personal, Darren, but I've often felt that no one involved with |> UnixWare was really aware of what a real heterogeneous Unix-style |> network fully exploiting the facilities of HPUX, AIX, OSF, or Solaris |> looks like. In the market I work in, SCO and Netware are invisible. |> TCP/IP, NFS, automount, RPC, NIS, and mingled local- and wide-area |> networks are the opening joke; they are assumed, not notable features. Yea, I agree that what was once touted as features, is pretty much requirements in the networking area. |> |> : |> |> : |> Future: |> : |> |> : |> Solaris is much more strategic to SUN than UNIXware is to Novell. Recent |> : |> history and future projections indicate that Solaris is more likely |> : |> to be evolved to support new/emerging technologies. |> |> : How many subjective statements are they going to make. What makes people think |> : that UnixWare is not strategic to Novell? |> |> First, that's not what he said. He said Solaris was comparatively more |> important to Sun than UnixWare to Netware (oops - I mean Novell). |> |> Second, people think it because Novell, in press releases and at |> conferences and trade shows, and in sales presentations, acts that |> way. NetWare is more important than UnixWare. NetWare is more |> important than UnixWare. Most of the actual presentations I've heard |> about UnixWare focus on its integration with NetWare. At the last |> Uniforum I attended (which wasn't the most` recent) we were told by |> Novell that the really significant features of UnixWare 2.0 were MP |> support (which we were told would only appeal to a small part of the |> market) and improved integration with UnixWare. |> |> Third, people feel that way because Novell, outside of Usenet, has no |> clear message about UnixWare. I realize they are trying, but it hasn't |> worked yet, and a faux pas like the recent announcement of the |> deemphasis of the desktop and the rapprochement with Microsoft hurts. |> It may feel good to blame the press for misinterpretation, but if you |> use multisyllable words and compound sentences with those guys, no |> one can predict what they'll hear. |> |> [snip] Have you seen the insert in the Open Systems Today outlining UnixWare. I think Novell is clearly showing it's plans for UnixWare. Believe me, this company is commited to UnixWare. The recent advertising will show that. In terms of NetWare being more important than UnixWare, I would probably rewrite that to say NetWare is more profitable than UnixWare. And after all, money is what puts bread on my families table. Darren R. Davis UnixWare Developer Support Engineer Novell Developer Support Disclaimer: There is probably enough of my opinion expressed here that I should note that these are my feelings and obviously do not reflect those of Novell.