to know DOS is to know Unix?

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Half Bake » Sat, 23 Mar 2002 10:35:57



I just met a couple people at some dinner and one guy says that if you
know DOS, you know Unix because many of the commands are similar.  I
didn't want to be rude, so I sat there mildly amused, (half-baked, of
course :).

So anyway, I figured these are just another couple of lusers.  Ever
tried to awk anything in DOS?  My find command doesn't work right
either, no grep, no su, no xargs, what the hell?  Do I have a faulty
version of DOS or something?

I suppose if all you want to do is mkdir, rmdir and cd and maybe ping
something, you're okay, but I really can't think of much more you could
do.

Just thought I'd share that - hope y'all don't mind.  The level of
luserness is reaching too high a state for me to contain myself for much
longer.

Whew - I just found a really great Unix command that works at the DOS
prompt.  exit.  That's much better.

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Bigi Brad » Sat, 23 Mar 2002 12:07:11


Wasn't it Dumb Operating System?

--


Quote:> I just met a couple people at some dinner and one guy says that if you
> know DOS, you know Unix because many of the commands are similar.  I
> didn't want to be rude, so I sat there mildly amused, (half-baked, of
> course :).

> So anyway, I figured these are just another couple of lusers.  Ever
> tried to awk anything in DOS?  My find command doesn't work right
> either, no grep, no su, no xargs, what the hell?  Do I have a faulty
> version of DOS or something?

> I suppose if all you want to do is mkdir, rmdir and cd and maybe ping
> something, you're okay, but I really can't think of much more you could
> do.

> Just thought I'd share that - hope y'all don't mind.  The level of
> luserness is reaching too high a state for me to contain myself for much
> longer.

> Whew - I just found a really great Unix command that works at the DOS
> prompt.  exit.  That's much better.


 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Miljenko Jandr » Sat, 23 Mar 2002 13:21:43



> [......]
>Just thought I'd share that - hope y'all don't mind.  The level of
>luserness is reaching too high a state for me to contain myself for much
>longer.
> [.....]

You don't even know......

While I was trying to properly configure HACMP and squeeze a full disk
drawer into SSA loop without shutting down the system, director of IT
proudly showed me "UNIX for Dummies" he bought so he can keep an eye
on what his SAs/DBAs are doing.....

The point is not that he tried to learn: effort should be applauded.
The point is that a _director_ of IT honestly believed he can read
"UNIX for Dummies" book and understand my job.

I guess he asked your DOS friend for advice first....

mj

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Half Bake » Sat, 23 Mar 2002 14:20:01




> > [......]
> >Just thought I'd share that - hope y'all don't mind.  The level of
> >luserness is reaching too high a state for me to contain myself for much
> >longer.
> > [.....]

> You don't even know......

I can't believe I forgot to mention that the "sleep" command doesn't work on
Windows 2000.  It supposedly works on NT, but I, for reasons beyond the scope
of this post, had to implement a batch file on someone's 2000 Server that had
to pause for a few seconds.  I had to write a program to sleep for the
specified number of seconds, and then they gave me shit for it, because they
were worried that my very simply compiled C code might not be portable in the
future - uh, maybe we should write an RFP and take bids on a very well
supported sleep command for which we can buy an upgrade subscription for and
have 24 hours support, wouldn't that make more sense?

Quote:

> While I was trying to properly configure HACMP and squeeze a full disk
> drawer into SSA loop without shutting down the system, director of IT
> proudly showed me "UNIX for Dummies" he bought so he can keep an eye
> on what his SAs/DBAs are doing.....

Whenever I want to check on what someone's been doing, I look at their
shell's history file - everyone once in a while, I still learn something
useful by doing so, but it's rare.

Quote:

> The point is not that he tried to learn: effort should be applauded.
> The point is that a _director_ of IT honestly believed he can read
> "UNIX for Dummies" book and understand my job.

That reminds me, I've been meaning to write a series of ".... for
Dumbasses".  I think the "Unix for Dumbasses" book will have a simple
introduction like "If you are reading this, step away from the keyboard and
never touch it."  a single chapter would follow along with an extensive index
and appendix.  The chapter would simply read "man man", the index would
contain 2 entries (man, as a command and man, as an argument to the man
command.).  The appendix would consist of the output of the "man man" command
on whatever happened to be the most readily available OS at the time I get
around to writing it.
Quote:

> I guess he asked your DOS friend for advice first....

> mj

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Derek Konigsber » Sat, 23 Mar 2002 08:48:32


Hmm...  From what I've seen, the DOS command line has more in common with
VMS than it does with UNIX.  Of course, there's still nothing in common
there.  Sure, VMS has "dir" and 3-letter file extentions, but you'll really
confuse a DOS user if you show him that the VMS equivalent of "C:\> CD
\FOO\BAR" looks more like "SET DEFAULT DUA0:[FOO.BAR]".  ;)
-Derek

> I just met a couple people at some dinner and one guy says that if you
> know DOS, you know Unix because many of the commands are similar.  I
> didn't want to be rude, so I sat there mildly amused, (half-baked, of
> course :).

> So anyway, I figured these are just another couple of lusers.  Ever
> tried to awk anything in DOS?  My find command doesn't work right
> either, no grep, no su, no xargs, what the hell?  Do I have a faulty
> version of DOS or something?

> I suppose if all you want to do is mkdir, rmdir and cd and maybe ping
> something, you're okay, but I really can't think of much more you could
> do.

> Just thought I'd share that - hope y'all don't mind.  The level of
> luserness is reaching too high a state for me to contain myself for much
> longer.

> Whew - I just found a really great Unix command that works at the DOS
> prompt.  exit.  That's much better.

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Tonny van Geloo » Sat, 23 Mar 2002 18:57:46


Grin ;-)

"UNIX is UNIX, but there is something called BSD and something called
System-V, and they don't match"

Ever tried to explain that to your boss ?????



> > [......]
> >Just thought I'd share that - hope y'all don't mind.  The level of
> >luserness is reaching too high a state for me to contain myself for much
> >longer.
> > [.....]

> You don't even know......

> While I was trying to properly configure HACMP and squeeze a full disk
> drawer into SSA loop without shutting down the system, director of IT
> proudly showed me "UNIX for Dummies" he bought so he can keep an eye
> on what his SAs/DBAs are doing.....

> The point is not that he tried to learn: effort should be applauded.
> The point is that a _director_ of IT honestly believed he can read
> "UNIX for Dummies" book and understand my job.

> I guess he asked your DOS friend for advice first....

> mj

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Timothy J. Boga » Sun, 24 Mar 2002 01:16:19




>Wasn't it Dumb Operating System?

<snip>

Still one of the best sigs that I always meant to steal went something like:

DOS - a non-reentrant interrupt handling system, all it ever was, and all it
is ever going to be.

Cheers.
--
"I'm a big fan of ignorance based techniques, because humans
have a lot of ignorance, and we want to play our strong suit."
  Eric Lander  New Scientist

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Timothy J. Boga » Sun, 24 Mar 2002 01:23:09






<snip>

>Whenever I want to check on what someone's been doing, I look at their
>shell's history file - everyone once in a while, I still learn something
>useful by doing so, but it's rare.

Bingo.  It seems a law of the universe that wonderfull things are rare (if they
weren't would they seems wonderfull?), but it is important to be open to them
independent of their source.

Quote:

>> The point is not that he tried to learn: effort should be applauded.
>> The point is that a _director_ of IT honestly believed he can read
>> "UNIX for Dummies" book and understand my job.

>That reminds me, I've been meaning to write a series of ".... for
>Dumbasses".  I think the "Unix for Dumbasses" book will have a simple
>introduction like "If you are reading this, step away from the keyboard and
>never touch it."  a single chapter would follow along with an extensive index
>and appendix.  The chapter would simply read "man man", the index would
>contain 2 entries (man, as a command and man, as an argument to the man
>command.).  The appendix would consist of the output of the "man man" command
>on whatever happened to be the most readily available OS at the time I get
>around to writing it.

lusers seem to be capable of redeeming themselves, but by the time someone
has become CIO or deputy CIO by jumping on the Windoze bandwagon, banishment
appears to be the only solution.

BTW, given the ever increasing prevalance and influence of open source, I
already have your sequel written:

info  info

8-)

--
"I'm a big fan of ignorance based techniques, because humans
have a lot of ignorance, and we want to play our strong suit."
  Eric Lander  New Scientist

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Jerry Lesl » Sun, 24 Mar 2002 09:58:38


: Hmm...  From what I've seen, the DOS command line has more in common with
: VMS than it does with UNIX.  Of course, there's still nothing in common
: there.  Sure, VMS has "dir" and 3-letter file extentions, but you'll really
: confuse a DOS user if you show him that the VMS equivalent of "C:\> CD
: \FOO\BAR" looks more like "SET DEFAULT DUA0:[FOO.BAR]".  ;)
:

VMS has 39-character file names and 39-character extensions sometime
prior to VMS 5.0

The change isn't mentioned on VMS Release History Page:

  http://www.openvms.compaq.com/openvms/os/openvms-release-history.html
  OpenVMS.Compaq.com

--Jerry Leslie     (my opinions are strictly my own)

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Ed Wrigh » Sun, 24 Mar 2002 12:06:50


To make a really bad analogy
there are a ton of people who when asked about eating an unusual meat
will state that it tastes like chicken.
CLEARLY these people have never eaten chicken.

Does DOS "taste " like UNIX ?
See above really bad analogy

:-) /2

Ed

edw AT hevanet DOT com
I hope one day to become the kind of person my cat thinks I am

vidi venci veni

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Norman Levi » Sun, 24 Mar 2002 23:13:31


The 'unix for dummies' that I looked at should be used for barbeque starter.
I think the original author of the book bailed and the editor got stuck with
finishing it.  Hope it was revised.  I've heard better things about 'linux
for dummies'
norm



|
| > [......]
| >Just thought I'd share that - hope y'all don't mind.  The level of
| >luserness is reaching too high a state for me to contain myself for much
| >longer.
| > [.....]
|
| You don't even know......
|
| While I was trying to properly configure HACMP and squeeze a full disk
| drawer into SSA loop without shutting down the system, director of IT
| proudly showed me "UNIX for Dummies" he bought so he can keep an eye
| on what his SAs/DBAs are doing.....
|
| The point is not that he tried to learn: effort should be applauded.
| The point is that a _director_ of IT honestly believed he can read
| "UNIX for Dummies" book and understand my job.
|
| I guess he asked your DOS friend for advice first....
|
| mj

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Sridhar Ayeng » Mon, 08 Apr 2002 08:54:47


A lot of the stuff in DOS is evolved from CP/M, which is an extension
and expansion of RT-11, DEC's realtime OS for PDP-11 systems, the
predecessors of the VAXen.

Peace...  Sridhar


> Hmm...  From what I've seen, the DOS command line has more in common with
> VMS than it does with UNIX.  Of course, there's still nothing in common
> there.  Sure, VMS has "dir" and 3-letter file extentions, but you'll really
> confuse a DOS user if you show him that the VMS equivalent of "C:\> CD
> \FOO\BAR" looks more like "SET DEFAULT DUA0:[FOO.BAR]".  ;)
> -Derek


> > I just met a couple people at some dinner and one guy says that if you
> > know DOS, you know Unix because many of the commands are similar.  I
> > didn't want to be rude, so I sat there mildly amused, (half-baked, of
> > course :).

> > So anyway, I figured these are just another couple of lusers.  Ever
> > tried to awk anything in DOS?  My find command doesn't work right
> > either, no grep, no su, no xargs, what the hell?  Do I have a faulty
> > version of DOS or something?

> > I suppose if all you want to do is mkdir, rmdir and cd and maybe ping
> > something, you're okay, but I really can't think of much more you could
> > do.

> > Just thought I'd share that - hope y'all don't mind.  The level of
> > luserness is reaching too high a state for me to contain myself for much
> > longer.

> > Whew - I just found a really great Unix command that works at the DOS
> > prompt.  exit.  That's much better.

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Jose Pina Coelh » Tue, 09 Apr 2002 08:07:26



> A lot of the stuff in DOS is evolved from CP/M, which is an extension
> and expansion of RT-11, DEC's realtime OS for PDP-11 systems, the
> predecessors of the VAXen.

I have a huge dificulty seeing CP/M as an extension and expansion of
*any* real-time OS.

Care to explain that one ?

--
Doing AIX support was the most monty-pythonesque
activity available at the time.

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by root » Thu, 11 Apr 2002 03:59:59



> I just met a couple people at some dinner and one guy says that if you
> know DOS, you know Unix because many of the commands are similar.  I
> didn't want to be rude, so I sat there mildly amused, (half-baked, of
> course :).
> So anyway, I figured these are just another couple of lusers.  Ever
> tried to awk anything in DOS?  My find command doesn't work right
> either, no grep, no su, no xargs, what the hell?  Do I have a faulty
> version of DOS or something?

I don't think so. Switching from dos to *nix I found many differences.
Have a look at http://www.cms.dmu.ac.uk/Courses/Common/dosvunix.html.

Ciao
PV

 
 
 

to know DOS is to know Unix?

Post by Norman Levi » Thu, 11 Apr 2002 14:33:50




>>> I just met a couple people at some dinner and one guy says that if
>>> you know DOS, you know Unix because many of the commands are
>>> similar.  I didn't want to be rude, so I sat there mildly amused,
>>> (half-baked, of course :).

>>> So anyway, I figured these are just another couple of lusers.  Ever
>>> tried to awk anything in DOS?  My find command doesn't work right
>>> either, no grep, no su, no xargs, what the hell?  Do I have a faulty
>>> version of DOS or something?

** think the person who was making that comparison was just saying, if you
have
the idea of a directory leading to directory leading eventual to a real data
file,
that that concept might help you in feeling familar with unix.  Once you
feel
comfortable with directorys - the fact that one system has a dir vs a ls
command
is not that hard to swallow.  Of course as you get in the more complicated
command
such as awk then thing break apart - but you are just trying to help the
novice
past some conceptual barriers.

If you check the book shelves, you can find books with titles like:
a: unix for the dos person
b: unix for the vms person
and amazingly:
c: unix for the mvs person   (now THAT is a stretch!!!!)
norm

Quote:

>> I don't think so. Switching from dos to *nix I found many
>> differences. Have a look at
>> http://www.cms.dmu.ac.uk/Courses/Common/dosvunix.html.

>> Ciao
>> PV

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.343 / Virus Database: 190 - Release Date: 3/22/2002
 
 
 

1. I am a Linux Know Nothing, would like to know

you can shirnk your windows 98 partition and use the freed up space for
linux, then dual boot between the two (choose which to boot).. try
TurboLinux, www.turbolinux.com/orders/ you can grab the boxed set w/ manual
that walks you through every step of installing it, including shrinking your
partition, it also includes WordPerfect8 for linux.. you can also download
it via ftp and cheapbytes (www.cheapbytes.com) will have it soon as well,
though you won't get the book and probably won't get WP8.. as fors
creenshots, there are tons of places on the web you can find screenshots of
people's systems
-Justin

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Justin Ryan

Internet/Developer Relations Associate
Pacific HiTech / TurboLinux
http://www.turbolinux.com/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2. Rpms into tarfiles

3. How do I know which unix shell I am using.

4. Packard Bell Sound144 (Aztech)

5. X-Windows (yea, I know, I know)

6. Aspen Scientific or other curses packages

7. the WinTroll formerly known as "Taylor" is now known as "GERRI"

8. Automatic mail sorter/logger

9. The schizophrenic formerly known as "GERRI" is now known as "Depardeau"

10. Wanna know ways to know all about the Solaris...

11. rlogin (I know I know but we have to use it)

12. 3com 3c590b (I know, I know...) - problem

13. can I know the Can I know the battery power remind without apmd?