Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!bcm.tmc.edu!newsfeed.rice.edu!news.sesqui.net!uuneo.neosoft.com!nmtigw!peter From: peter@nmti.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: The Future of FreeBSD... Message-ID: <id.KGYL1._I4@nmti.com> Sender: peter@nmti.com (peter da silva) Organization: Network/development platform support, NMTI References: <3uktse$d9c@hal.nt.tuwien.ac.at> <3us0rg$7ph@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <id.GFWL1.CG3@nmti.com> <3v42d4$qmb@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 16:05:33 GMT Lines: 158 In article <3v42d4$qmb@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, Jon Jenkins <jenkinsj@ozy.dec.com> wrote: > peter@nmti.com (Peter da Silva) wrote: > >In article <3us0rg$7ph@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, > >Jon Jenkins <jenkinsj@ozy.dec.com> wrote: > >> Actually Windows/386 was the first and the compatilbility problems > >> killed the other efforts. I'm sure that this compatibilty problem > >> was not all by "accident". > >I *used* the first version of Windows, the one that "beat" the rest. > >And I quit using it shortly thereafter. The rest were MUCH more compatible > >with what counted... DOS... > So did I but a lot didn't. I have not met *anyone* who will admit to having used Windows until fairly late in the game. Long after Desqview and Gem had been out for a long time. Windows 1.x was all but unusable, and Windows 2 was a long time coming. > Yes thats true. But the fact still remains it is possible to set > up Eudora in a few minutes without reading a single man/page. And the same is true of, oh, exmh. > The example of printing was not trite in the least. I still > cannot print any graphics with my dot matix printer on UNIX. I don't have any difficulty. As far as the software is concerned all my printers are Postscript, including the Epson LQ570. > That and a decent word processor and GUI fax are the only reaons > I still use Windows at all. I'm setting up HylaFax right now. I'm just waiting for the modem. > >Yeh. How *do* you set up a printer in Windows so it prints a banner page? > >I'm still trying to figure this out. If I install the ".SEP" files they > >provided the printer spits out an error message and dumps the job. > I dont consdier banner pages in the same league as not being able to > print at all. You don't have 100 people's printouts coming out on the same printer. > >> Windsock was trivial, perhaps a few minutes. > >Yeh, clients are inherently easier to configure. > >I'm still working on getting network backup of my NT server up. > We had no problesm with this ( I didnt do it myself the sysadmin > did) so I dont know how much effort was required, either in > time or acuired knowledge, but it took only a few minutes > to set the backup to the UNIX server. Well, get your sysadmin to drop me a line. The NT backup software ONLY supports directly connected tape devices, totally incompatible with our centralized backup scheme. > >> /etc/hosts > >> /etc/hosts.conf, bind, NIS, SLIP, PPP, routing, device > >> slattach, etc etc .... There really is no comparison > >Right. UNIX exposes the configuration details. Windows hides them, so if > >you're doing anything but setting up a vanilla client you're scrod. > They should be hidden fromthe average user. Windows hides them from all but the most dedicated expert. Some of them are hardcoded in the software (like the backup device must be a tape) so you're out of luck there. > The whole > philosphy of modern computing and OO is to hide > the details IF you dont want to see them. But when you want to see them they need to be visible. It's a lot easier to write a wrapper to hide the details than binary patch executables to expose them. > The config > files, *.ini, are there if you want to get in and > hack them with notepad or whatever. Not in NT. A lot are hidden in the resource database, and others aren't visible at all. > I suspect that there were other reasons as well: > 1: cheap apps 2: cheap apps 3: cheap apps 4: cheap apps ... > >I'm supporting UNIX and NT here. NT is easy to set up in a vanilla > >configuration. It is *impossible* to debug problems. You just have to > >try things... I'm not talking about "I don't know how this works" I mean > >"there is no indication what the problem is". > I have not had much to do with NT but I have heard this > before. The error logging is supposed to be preety good > if you turn on all the options. But I'll take > your word that it is not as good as reported. I've got all the options I can find turned on and I still get "Can't initialize subsystem", without even the name of the subsystem it couldn't initialize. "Perror" is a better interface than that! > Yes I do agree that UNIX histoically has had lots of > error logging output. The output however has not > always been of much use: > /var/syslog.dated/XX:XX:XX > my_app: init failed: timeout on device: /dev/my_device with error code: 56 > Huh what the hell does that mean ??? It means either the device isn't connected, or it's not properly configured. It tells you what the device is, and where it's connected. And it implies that there's a hardware document over on the shelf that'll explain error code 56. That's loads better than "something's wrong but I'm not saying what". > A popup dialog with a help button and decent human > readable help text and suggestions is obviously preferred. Not if the popup dialog with a help button and decent human readable text and suggestions lead you down a dead end. Oh, I found one of my problems. I used blind testing. A UNIX box would have told me the problem immediately. It was... there was nothing plugged into the other end of the UTP cable up on the third floor. I'd loved to have gotten ed0: timeout on the console. > There is > no reason why UNIX community can't borrow the "good" bits > from Windows, NT or any OS. Just so long as it doesn't pull in the *bad* bits thinking they're good. I'll take RSX-11 over NT any day. -- Peter da Silva (NIC: PJD2) `-_-' Network Management Technology Incorporated 'U` 1601 Industrial Blvd. Sugar Land, TX 77478 USA +1 713 274 5180 "Har du kramat din varg idag?"