Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by L S » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00



Point for Unix folks: If WNT is a better VMS, then this is a point for
NOT using WNT.

Microsoft said WNT is 'a better Unix than Unix'.

I would say WNT is 'a better VMS than VMS'.

To all: Which side do you take?

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by This space intentionally left bla » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00



Quote:

>Point for Unix folks: If WNT is a better VMS, then this is a point for
>NOT using WNT.

>Microsoft said WNT is 'a better Unix than Unix'.

>I would say WNT is 'a better VMS than VMS'.

>To all: Which side do you take?

Neither, NT is not a replacement for VMS or Unix.  Until it has multi-user
support it is just a better Windows than Windows.

-- Mike "...as long as what you need to run will run under it..." Bartman --

==============================================================================
| I didn't really say all the things that I said.  You probably didn't read  |
| what you thought you read.  Statistics show that this whole thing is more  |
| than likely just a hideous misunderstanding.                               |
==============================================================================

==============================================================================
Gotta love me!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by sharn.. » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00




Quote:> Neither, NT is not a replacement for VMS or Unix.  Until it has multi-user
> support it is just a better Windows than Windows.

> -- Mike "...as long as what you need to run will run under it..." Bartman --

        Looks like another Unix bigot who doesn't know the capabilities
of NT. :)  Sorry NT is multi-user.  If you mean tools and such to take full
advantage of the system, that's another story.

Josiah Yegerlehner

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by Terry C Shann » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00


Based on the content of a Digital-sponsored presentation on OpenVMS Futures
(DECUS Anaheim, December '94) I believe that Digital in the near term
will tighten the affinity between OpenVMS and Windows NT.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

  For a free sample of _Shannon Knows DEC_, The Newsletter That Takes No

  Or, meet *Digital Dog* at http://www.mv.com/biz/illuminata/ddog.html

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by Mike Lipsie M » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00




Quote:

>Point for Unix folks: If WNT is a better VMS, then this is a point for
>NOT using WNT.

>Microsoft said WNT is 'a better Unix than Unix'.

>I would say WNT is 'a better VMS than VMS'.

>To all: Which side do you take?

How many angels did you say were dancing on the head of that pin?

--


 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by Joe Slo » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00




>    Looks like another Unix bigot who doesn't know the capabilities
>of NT. :)  Sorry NT is multi-user.  If you mean tools and such to take full
>advantage of the system, that's another story.

If you think nt is multiuser, that speaks volumes about your background...

* to someone from a dos/windoze background, nt would probably look like
 a multiuser system (see, I can log in, and then when I'm done, betty can
 log in! wow! isn't that cool?)

* when someone from a UNIX background tries nt and discovers the
  limitatons, they say "hey this isn't multiuser - it's just a toy!"...

for me, nt will never do!

--

 A linux machine! because a 486  |      University of California
 is a terrible thing to waste!   |          909-787-2220
~

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by Jerry Gardn » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00



: Neither, NT is not a replacement for VMS or Unix.  Until it has multi-user
: support it is just a better Windows than Windows.

What's with all this "multiuser" hype? Why would I want someone else
sharing my machine? Someone once said: "One user, at least one CPU".
I think this makes sense.

--

Rocket Scientist                               "Why ask why?"

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by Mike Lipsie M » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00






>>        Looks like another Unix bigot who doesn't know the capabilities
>>of NT. :)  Sorry NT is multi-user.  If you mean tools and such to take full
>>advantage of the system, that's another story.

>If you think nt is multiuser, that speaks volumes about your background...

If you think it is not, that speaks a great deal about your knowledge.

NT, the OS, is multi-user in EXACTLY the same sense that Unix, the OS,
is multi-user.

On Unix which is configured to allow it, I can log in from either the
keyboard connected to the box or across the network and run character
based applications, X-windows programs, or other network-aware packages.

I can do the same thing on NT.

On both systems I can do that whether or not there is another user logged
in.

--


 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by sharn.. » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00






>>        Looks like another Unix bigot who doesn't know the capabilities
>>of NT. :)  Sorry NT is multi-user.  If you mean tools and such to take full
>>advantage of the system, that's another story.

> If you think nt is multiuser, that speaks volumes about your background...

> * to someone from a dos/windoze background, nt would probably look like
>  a multiuser system (see, I can log in, and then when I'm done, betty can
>  log in! wow! isn't that cool?)

> * when someone from a UNIX background tries nt and discovers the
>   limitatons, they say "hey this isn't multiuser - it's just a toy!"...

> for me, nt will never do!


        Simply amazing.  You can say it a million times and they still won't
believe you.  NT is multi-user, although the interface is not conducive to its
being used that way.  You can speculate about my background all you want,
but your blanket statement that NT is not multi-user indicates your lack of
knowledge regarding NT.  Over the past year it has been interesting to witness
the occasional unix bigot walk in here, deride NT for not being multi-user just
as you have done, swear up and down for a few more posts that NT can't
possibly be multi-user, and then usually one of two things happen.  They
disappear or they admit their error.  Well you can believe me now, or struggle
a little bit first. :)  Eventually, Jim Frost will pick up on the thread and tell you
10 times more about Unix then you ever thought you'd know.  His enlightening
posts are one of the few reasons to follow this group.  I know I've learned a
hell of a lot from him.  Anyway, yes NT was written by the evil MS and the
interface sucks, but underneath lies a very powerful OS.  Well this was
probably just wasted breath, but one has to try. :)

Josiah Yegerlehner

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by muzaf.. » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00



> : NT, the OS, is multi-user in EXACTLY the same sense that Unix, the OS,
> : is multi-user.

I wouldn't go that far. NT doesn't have the API's (or they are undocumented) to
create a desktop for each logon. So you can logon as a different user with
certain security rights to an NT machine but you share the same desktop.
(which means you see the net used drives the current user has etc).

Quote:> Oh no, another clueless microsoft cheerleader rushing to defend his ikon -

Oh no, another clueless *nix bigot showing his ignorance.

Quote:> * can you perform system administration tasks, add users, change
>   file permissions, compile programs?
>   NO

a resounding YES. Not only can you use the command line utilities but
you can also use the GUI utilities which come NT to manage other NT
machines.

Quote:> * can you run X?
>   NO

again YES. You can display X programs on NT with an X window server
and also you can recompile  your favourite X app to NT (you can get
the headers and libraries for X11R6 for NT  from ftp.x.org) and use
it as the client for other machines.

r* and telnet are not very attractive options (which are available though)
for an NT user because most of the functionality these have can be
used through  NT GUI tools which come in the box.

Yes, NT is not *nix (not yet anyway; I wouldn't be surprised if someone
wrote a SPEC 1170 subsystem for NT and got the X/Open certification;
Wait for this to happen :-) but it does all the jobs *nix does at least
as well but in different ways.

Muzaffer

standard disclaimer

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by lene » Sat, 08 Apr 1995 04:00:00


: Point for Unix folks: If WNT is a better VMS, then this is a point for
: NOT using WNT.

: Microsoft said WNT is 'a better Unix than Unix'.

: I would say WNT is 'a better VMS than VMS'.

: To all: Which side do you take?

The kernel is close to a Mach kernel then anything else so the answer would
be neither.

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by Mark.Berry.. » Sun, 09 Apr 1995 04:00:00




>: NT, the OS, is multi-user in EXACTLY the same sense that Unix, the OS,
>: is multi-user.
>: On Unix which is configured to allow it, I can log in from either the
>: keyboard connected to the box or across the network and run character
>: based applications, X-windows programs, or other network-aware packages.
>: I can do the same thing on NT.

>Oh no, another clueless microsoft cheerleader rushing to defend his ikon -

>You haven't been very far down the road if you are making naive statments
>like that - if nt acted just like UNIX, I'd be diggin' it big time, just
>like I dig BSD, SunOS, linux, Irix, and all the other true UNIX-like
>systems....

>So you've discovered you can telnet in to an nt box? (yipee) - now, what
>can you do once you've telnetted in?

>* can you telnet out from your nt PeeCee after you telnet in?
>  NO

Yes.

Quote:>* can you perform system administration tasks, add users, change
>  file permissions, compile programs?
>  NO

Yes.

Quote:>* can you use the "r" commands to/from your nt PeeCee?  
>  NO

Sigh.  As with too many unix apologists, security concerns simply don't apply.
Or can it be that you really don't understand how easy it is to hack any system
that uses the "r" services?

Quote:>* can you run X?
>  NO

Yes.

If you paid any attention in class, you've probably been taught since childhood
that everyone has a right to his opinion.  However, among polite society, we
usually have a few facts to back them up before we spout them in public.

Mark Berryman

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by David Wi » Sun, 09 Apr 1995 04:00:00



Quote:

>Based on the content of a Digital-sponsored presentation on OpenVMS Futures
>(DECUS Anaheim, December '94) I believe that Digital in the near term
>will tighten the affinity between OpenVMS and Windows NT.

Makes sense. DEC probably spends more than any other single organization
in trying to get its stuff to run cleanly on all three OS's (NT, VMS, Unix).

If DEC's strategy weren't so, uhm, wobbly, they could probably make some
wonderful toolkits that would simplfy the life of all ISVs.

Sigh. We'll probably have to wait for the Unix and VMS ports of Visual C++.
      :-)

-David

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by Christopher B. Brow » Sun, 09 Apr 1995 04:00:00





>>If you think nt is multiuser, that speaks volumes about your background...

>If you think it is not, that speaks a great deal about your knowledge.

>NT, the OS, is multi-user in EXACTLY the same sense that Unix, the OS,
>is multi-user.

>On Unix which is configured to allow it, I can log in from either the
>keyboard connected to the box or across the network and run character
>based applications, X-windows programs, or other network-aware packages.

>I can do the same thing on NT.

The difference is in the modifier "configured to allow it."

Virtually all versions of UNIX come with the appropriate configurations
to allow these things using software that is standard, indeed, generally
required for basic operation of the system.

It appears that most of this requires additional software for NT that
is not included.

If I pick a random UNIX box that has been connected to a network, I can
probably telnet into it.  For an NT Server, it appears that this
requires at the very least, *configuration* of additional software.  To
X in requires $3500 worth of additional Tektronix software, whereas that
is standard configuration for the common UNIX systems (aside from AIX,
which is just strange).  And I have no idea whether any of this is even
possible on an NT Workstation.

"Theoretically Possible" != "Standard Configuration."
--

In most of their applications, GUIs are primarily a tool that enables
capitalists to exploit cheap, dispensable, unskilled labour - The GUI
Manifesto

 
 
 

Is Windows NT a better VMS or a better Unix ?

Post by Mark Komarins » Sun, 09 Apr 1995 04:00:00






: >
: >>      Looks like another Unix bigot who doesn't know the capabilities
: >>of NT. :)  Sorry NT is multi-user.  If you mean tools and such to take full
: >>advantage of the system, that's another story.
: >
: >If you think nt is multiuser, that speaks volumes about your background...

: If you think it is not, that speaks a great deal about your knowledge.

: NT, the OS, is multi-user in EXACTLY the same sense that Unix, the OS,
: is multi-user.

: On Unix which is configured to allow it, I can log in from either the
: keyboard connected to the box or across the network and run character
: based applications, X-windows programs, or other network-aware packages.

: I can do the same thing on NT.

: On both systems I can do that whether or not there is another user logged
: in.

Ahh..but where does the app really run?  If the app is merely copied from
the NT box and runs on your machine, it is not 'multi-user' and merely
is a network fileserver.

If, however, the program gets executed on the NT side and the results/windows
are displayed on your machine, then it is multi-user.

X applications that get sent across the network (i.e. I log into a remote
machine and tell it to send the X display to my screen) is running
multi-user, as the X program is running on the remote machine.

--

Did you know that 50% of statistics are made up?