Isaac_K_Rabinovitch@cup.portal.com (01/15/88)
bhj@bhjat.UUCP (Burt Janz) writes
->
->Oh, for crying out loud! I have Microport SV/AT 2.3, and am pleased as all
->heck about the state of the software. I've been using uport since 1.36, and
->have noticed nothing BUT improvements in each update of the software.
->
->What do you want for ~$600? Perfection?!? And, with the number of problems
->that I note in comp.unix.xenix, XENIX hacks have NO room to flame on
->Microport!
->
->So, QUIT FLAMING ON MICROPORT!!!!! YOU should do so well!!!
Burt, your comments are valuable, but so are those of people who've had a
less positive experience with Microport. I'd like the think we could
discuss our differences of opinions without going into tantrum mode.
I'm posting this instead of mailing it to Burt because I've gotten rather
tired of net messages, especially in the technical conferences, that
view differences of opinion as purely a negative thing. The word "flame"
itself seems to indicate an immature, hyperdefensive attitude that
doesn't go along with the exchange of ideas we're all here for. I've
found postings from both Xenix and uPort fanatics useful, and I think
both sides would benefit if each had a little respect for the intelligence
of the other.
Incidentally, I'm still fighting with myself as to whether to put a U*x on
my AT clone. So here's your chance to make a convert.
Isaac Rabinovitch
Disclaimer: Just because I think you're wrong, doesn't
mean I don't think you're a fun person!
:-)bhj@bhjat.UUCP (Burt Janz) (01/20/88)
In article <2468@cup.portal.com>, Isaac_K_Rabinovitch@cup.portal.com writes: > bhj@bhjat.UUCP (Burt Janz) writes > -> (lots of my ...comments... here) > I'd like the think we could > discuss our differences of opinions without going into tantrum mode. > > Incidentally, I'm still fighting with myself as to whether to put a U*x on > my AT clone. So here's your chance to make a convert. > > Isaac Rabinovitch Believe it or not, I don't like to "flame" back at people, and I'd much rather be constructive in a quiet way than shout and scream. I would much rather see valuable and constructive commentary on the deficits in one operating system vs. the "extras" in another. However, there are quite a few religious converts on the net who have forgotten BSD 4.0, or maybe SIII. Both of those systems were, shall we say, less than perfect. But, discussions on the bugs concentrated on how to fix them, and not whether SIII was better than 4.0. This situation seems to have disappeared where the XENIX vs. Microport issue is concerned. That is too bad. Both operating systems have their high and low points, but neither has that "special something" which makes one better than the other. I have, and still do, use both operating systems. For my personal system, I chose Microport due to price, it's being System V compatible, and the availability of DOSMerge. XENIX is based around System III with some System V enhancements, but was not close enough to the SVID for me. I spent quite some time on the telephone with both companies, and found that the Microport crew was a bit friendlier and much more willing to send patches and other data out to users. Their BBS system is a very good idea, allowing Microport users to get patches, sources to PD utilities, and other programs which ease the use of non-distributed software. On the other hand, the Microsoft group seemed a little bit tight-lipped when I got through to them, and used the expression "it's being worked on for the next release" a little too much for my taste. And, that IS a religious opinion :-). The original posting (my comments) was answered privately by the person I was reverse posting to. I offered him the ability to log in to my Microport system and play with it, in an opportunity to see what he might be buying. That offer still stands. I wish that both Microport and Microsoft would offer this service. That way, prospective users could "try before you buy". Of course, there is a limit to how much you can do in a guest account before you make a nuisance of yourself. Having worked for the now-defunct Cadmus systems company, I found that allowing customers to run benchmarks of their code on our systems actually INCREASED sales. I agree that "flaming" is counter-productive. I apologize to anyone whom I may have offended by my comments. They were not meant to offend, but to attempt to put an end to the "my car is better than yours" debate. Both operating systems are UNIX, both have the ability to run DOS as a task under UNIX, and both provide a full set of utility programs to the buyer. It is up to the user to make an intelligent choice, and if he is disappointed, to constructively comment on the software. Burt Janz
bhj@bhjat.UUCP (Burt Janz) (01/29/88)
In article <373@igloo.UUCP>, learn@igloo.UUCP (william vajk) writes: > > I received a disk of beta patches from uport for the kernel and the sio > drivers. These have made a marked improvement on this system, though I > am still forced to desist from any activity during inbound uucp transfers. > Which version of the kernel are you running? If it is 2.3, what changes were made to the sio driver? I am "vi"ing this response during a Kermit receive over /dev/tty0 @1200 baud. Understandably, that's rather slow, but Kermit keeps the line as busy as uucp... By the way, I have noted what appears to be a SERIOUS timing anomaly in the Phoenix 3.06 bios. Apparently, the vendor has licenced the source to the bios rom to be able to put his own name in the POST screen (vanity, thy name is seller... ouch...). The 3.06 rom appears to have some minor timing changes in it which show up on the I/O interrupt lines. I don't understand it all yet, but my Tektronics scope showed that the I/O lines seemed to be active a whole lot more with that rom. When I shoved the 3.00 Phoenix rom back into the board, the timing problems went away. Notably, the problems I have had with the floppy drive disappeared with the older version of the bios. Interesting, eh? > As a result of this and other discussions on the net, I have received mail > from others using uport '286 products, and have asked for specifics of > use and configuration. I have a 286 6/10/12mhz motherboard from SIREX in New York (they're a distributor... I buy wholesale), 200w power supply, WD controller (the one with the leadless chip carrier), 1 IBM brand p/s card, 1 clone p/s card, the MCT-ATRAM board which does NOT run above 6MHZ (and they promised it would!...Jade..), and a Video-7 VEGA card (the old model, not the Deluxe). Monitor - TAXAN 770, probably the best color around. Drives: 1.2 IBM brand floppy (yes, the real thing), Maxtor 1065 as primary, Quantum Q540 as second drive. And, of course, the Phoenix 3.00 bios. Primary use is for porting software, acting as a mail node, and doing general work using DOS utilities and programs under DOSMerge. What with all the compiles going (3 virtual consoles all compiling at the same time.. what a drag!), you really get to see how a 286 needs to grow up to be a 386. But, since I can really only run at 6mhz, I'm IMPRESSED with how well the software works. > I have received excellent telephone responses from uport too, in spite > of the fact that I probably represent a thorn in someone's side at times. > There is something to be said *for* a company that keeps working with you > under adverse circumstances. > > Bill Vajk learn@igloo With all the calls they get from me, they either consider me a pain in the... neck... or, maybe, a real help in nailing down what are real problems. Having been in customer support before, I found that customers who had real problems, but were willing to help you figure them out patiently, were a tremendous asset. Burt Janz ...decvax!bhjat!bhj