*BSD News Article 59609


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.aix
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!bry
From: bry@netcom.com (Bryan Althaus)
Subject: Re: ISP hardware/software choices (performance comparison)
Message-ID: <bryDL5wtq.4Fo@netcom.com>
Followup-To: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.aix
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <4cmopu$d35@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <4cu7t0$mg5@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> <4cv8j1$59k@park.uvsc.edu> <4d37d4$j0l@gremlin.backfire.mn.org> <DL29Az.Ax2@ftel.co.uk> <bryDL3r9p.2oq@netcom.com> <4da5nl$8l5@news.voicenet.com>
Distribution: inet
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 1996 08:27:25 GMT
Lines: 57
Sender: bry@netcom20.netcom.com
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:1958 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:2102 comp.unix.solaris:57228 comp.unix.aix:68703

MIT (MIT) wrote:
: bry@netcom.com (Bryan Althaus) wrote:

: >When we ported to Solaris 2.4 and rewrote using real threads, the problems
: >all went away.  Wonder why?  

: because you guys are lamers, and couldn't make your deadline. quite
: naturally, you blamed "the other guy", and scapegoated 4.1.3.

I'll bet you anything you have *never* touched threaded code so you
can't appreciated how bad SunOS 4.1.x threads are how nice an environment
Solaris gives you when doing threads.  

As for the deadline, its not the first that was missed, but when Sun tells
you pthreads for SunOS 4.1.x suck, they are not going to be supported in
the future, "DON'T USE THEM!", and a programmer or two go off and use them
and get burnt, it's like get a clue.  The same code is fine under Solaris
because Solaris was designed to be threaded and support SMP.

You just don't slap this stuff into an OS, it has to be designed before
hand.  This is the first thing you learn in OOP.  Design up front. 

: Now your love affair begins with 2.4. One question: what was your
: initial reaction upon finding out that Sun "unbundled" the C compiler
: from the mighty Solaris? Nice touch, huh?

I've used alot of UNIX's. 4.2 BSD with major kernel enhancements at the
University I went to was my favorite for many years. I've used vanilla
SYSV 3.2 which I hated.  HPUX 3.x, 7.x, 8.x, and 9.x most of the HP-UX
releases I liked.  SunOS was a nice polished 4.2BSD with SYSV thrown
in.  After I tried UnixWare and knew SVR4 was a step above SunOS 4.1.x.
When Solaris 2.4 hit beta and the rumors were that it was stable and
was the version of Solaris that people had waited for, we took a gamble
and went with it.  It turned out the gamble payed off.  Solaris 2.4
combined with SunSoft WorkShop C++ made the best development environment
I've ever used.  My point is I used Solaris *after* all these other UNIX's
and I choose Solaris. My only bias is that I found Solaris better. I've
even done some NT programming and I like NT also, just I consider
Solaris  the nest OS currently out there.  

Next week when I upgrade to Solaris 2.5, I'm sure my "love affair" will
continue.  The only difference is I don't hate SunOS 4.1.x, it just that
Solaris 2.x is better, its *supported*, it is state of the art.

As for the compiler being unbundled.  Who the hell cares?  Do you pay for
it?  Get a real job and have them buy you some tools.  cc does me little
good when I do C++ programming, and I still need a GUI debugger.  Should 
Sun bundle a C++ compiler?

I've *never* heard anyone complain that MS does not bundle Visual C++
with Windows 3.x, Windows95 or NT.  Or that you have to buy Visual Basic.