mattern@ma.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane L Mattern) (05/03/87)
Does anyone have any information about the operating system QNX for PC's 8086,186,286? It is suppose to be a multitasking, multi-user UNIX look alike for the ibm PC compatibles. Has or is anyone using this system? How many systems do you have on the LAN? Is the group that wrote this O/S on the Net (Quantum, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada)? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Duane L. Mattern, Controls ARPA: mattern@ecn.purdue.edu Mechanical Engineering UUCP: ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!mattern ME 13, Purdue University West Lafayette, IN 47907 Voice: (317)494-6552 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
jjc@sdiris1.UUCP (Jim J. Carter) (05/04/87)
in article <651@ma.ecn.purdue.edu>, mattern@ma.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane L Mattern) says: > > > Does anyone have any information about the operating system > QNX for PC's 8086,186,286? It is suppose to be a multitasking, > multi-user UNIX look alike for the ibm PC compatibles. I was under the impression that it was *NOT* a unix look alike. In fact that was the main point in the add I read a few months ago. It had a message passing/os at the low level(somewhat like MINIX: mabey a bad example). > is anyone using this system? How many systems do you have on > the LAN? Is the group that wrote this O/S on the Net > > Duane L. Mattern, Controls ARPA: mattern@ecn.purdue.edu From what I read, the os looked very interesting and quite usefull. I would like to know more about it if anyone has some information. My questions : Does QNX run on top of MS-DOS?? Do you need special libraries and/or compilers to run under QNX?? Is there some type of "termcap" for different types of terminals ?? etc,etc,etc... ----------------------------------------------------------------------- UUCP: ...!sdcsvax!jack!man!sdiris1!jim | Jim Carter Work : +1 619 450 6516 | Control Data Corporation (CIM)
dan@prairie.UUCP (05/05/87)
In article <575@sdiris1.UUCP> jjc@sdiris1.UUCP (Jim J. Carter) writes: >in article <651@ma.ecn.purdue.edu>, mattern@ma.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane L Mattern) says: >> Does anyone have any information about the operating system >> QNX for PC's 8086,186,286? I've written quite an exhaustive note to mattern about this. Perhaps he can repost or remail it if there is enough interest. >My questions : >Does QNX run on top of MS-DOS?? No. But MS-DOS will run as a task under QNX, and QNX can read and write MS-DOS file systems (including hard disk partitions) as easily as its own. It's pretty slick. >Do you need special libraries and/or compilers to run under QNX?? QNX comes with a C compiler and lots of libraries. >Is there some type of "termcap" for different types of terminals ?? Yes. There is something called `tcap'. You fill out a full-screen form to register a terminal. It supports color and function keys. It also knows if the terminal is a console and uses a direct-to-video- memory shared library that has blinding speed, even on an XT. tcap has features to support line drawing, bar graphs, and automatic bounce-bar menus. It's quite a bit richer than termcap in that respect. -- Dan Frank (w9nk) ARPA: dan@db.wisc.edu ATT: (608) 255-0002 (home) UUCP: ... uwvax!prairie!dan (608) 262-4196 (office) SNAILMAIL: 1802 Keyes Ave. Madison, WI 53711-2006
cy@ashtate.UUCP (Cy Shuster) (05/05/87)
In article <575@sdiris1.UUCP> jjc@sdiris1.UUCP (Jim J. Carter) writes: >> Does anyone have any information about the operating system >> QNX for PC's 8086,186,286? It is suppose to be a multitasking, >> multi-user UNIX look alike for the ibm PC compatibles. See the April 28 issue of PC Week for an article on Un*x and Un*x-like systems for the PC. The developer of QNX is Quantum Software Systems, 215 Stafford Road, Nepean, Ontario Canada K2H 9C1, (613) 726-1893.
ittfb@dcatla.UUCP (Thomas F. Blakely) (05/07/87)
In article <575@sdiris1.UUCP> jjc@sdiris1.UUCP (Jim J. Carter) writes: >> Does anyone have any information about the operating system >> QNX for PC's 8086,186,286? It is suppose to be a multitasking, >> multi-user UNIX look alike for the ibm PC compatibles. > >I was under the impression that it was *NOT* a unix look alike. It's not Unix, but it shares _some_ features. If you're used to the Bourne shell on System 3, you should feel quite at home. It is multi-tasking, message passing, networked, small and fast, just like the ads say. >> is anyone using this system? How many systems do you have on >> the LAN? Is the group that wrote this O/S on the Net I've been using QNX (on and off) for about 4 years now, through several releases. It's clean and tight -- it does what the doc says it does, and it's relatively hard to crash (unless you let your pointers run wild a lot). I haven't used the network version, but they tell me it works fine and they haven't lied to me yet. I don't know if they are on the net (usenet). > >From what I read, the os looked very interesting and quite usefull. >I would like to know more about it if anyone has some information. > I have found it both. I wish more people used it, so I wouldn't feel like I _have_ to use MS-DOS on my pc. >My questions : >Does QNX run on top of MS-DOS?? Absolutely not! It has its own OS kernel and file system. It _will_ run _most_ MS-DOS programs (with an optional software package) by running MS-DOS as a task under QNX. What they have done is implement a virtual IBM PC under QNX. You can run exactly one of these on each machine, and can run QNX tasks in background (or stop DOS, run some QNX task, and restart DOS). You have several virtual consoles available, so moving from QNX to DOS (and v.v.) is very simple (via "hot key"). Of course you can have QNX terminals running during all of this, too. The fact that they implemented a virtual IBM PC means that if your machine will run QNX, it will run MS-DOS programs under QNX that might not run on your machine under MS-DOS (if, for example, your machine is not a "close compatible). I haven't verified this, since I have only used QNX on IBMs or clones. >Do you need special libraries and/or compilers to run under QNX?? They provide a very nice C compiler with QNX. I've seen it criticized because it only supports the small (64k data, 64k code) model and because it has a couple of extensions to K&R. In practice, I have found neither of these to be limitations in writing some fairly large applications or in porting to and from either Unix or DOS. The support for shared libraries (I wish Unix had this!) and tight code, in addition to a very usable message passing mechanism makes the program size limitations almost insignificant. Also, there is a ficility to index off the 8086/8 extra-segment register, which allows use of more than 64k of data, at the cost of portability. The provided libraries have good support for QNX features and reasonable adherance to what you expect from a C library. I don't know where they stand with the proposed ANSI C standards. You can get BASIC, Pascal, and, I think, FORTRAN as well. These all use the same back-end (code generator and linker) as the C compiler, so the library is common to all, and routines can be shared. >Is there some type of "termcap" for different types of terminals ?? There is indeed, but you have to write entries for all but the console and a (very) few others. The "standard" QNX editor (which I like a lot) will run on any terminal you can write a termcap entry for (I wrote one for my Hazeltine 1520, so it can be done and the terminal doesn't have to be _real_ smart). >etc,etc,etc... There's a word processor and database and all of the usual type stuff available. Communications support (even terminal emulation -- again you program the features you want) is standard. Print spooling, installable device drivers, low-level screen support, an on-line help facility, shell escapes from most programs, buffered I/O, disk caching, ram disk, what else would you like to know. Oh yes, it runs in as little as 256K with a single floppy (2 to be usable). It requires a separate partition on a hard disk (easy to do) and can boot from floppy or hard disk (you select). It reads and writes the DOS partition. I have a 20 meg hard disk with a 16 meg DOS partition and the rest for QNX. My DOS partition is getting full, my QNX partition is half empty after 2 years. Part of this is that I use DOS more heavily, but part of it is the size of QNX programs vs. that of DOS programs. QNX executables are unbelievably small. The entire system, including the C compiler and some optional software is less than 1 meg. QNX ain't UN*X. But for a pc, it's (in my opinion) a much better OS than either Unix or DOS. If only it were more popular (and maybe cheaper -- $650, ouch!). -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The usual disclaimers. I have no association with Quantum other that as a very satisfied user of their products. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Blakely DCA Inc. {akgua, gatech, sun!sunatl}!dcatla!ittfb
raanan@bc-cis.UUCP (Raanan Herrmann) (05/08/87)
in article <651@ma.ecn.purdue.edu>, mattern@ma.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane L Mattern) says: > Does anyone have any information about the operating system > QNX for PC's 8086,186,286? It is suppose to be a multitasking, > multi-user UNIX look alike for the ibm PC compatibles. It is not a Unix operating system, it is just a little bit similar. It is multitasking and multi-user (by hooking more terminals to an AT or by creating a LAN with other PCs). > is anyone using this system? How many systems do you have on > the LAN? Is the group that wrote this O/S on the Net I used the system, I had 2 PCs on the LAN. In general, since it is a propriety OS, you can not find much software for it, there are many bugs, the system is not friendly and the documentation is terrible. If you look in one of the previous issues (Jan 87?) of PC-Tech-Journal, you will find a good detailed descrition of the OS. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Raanan Herrmann (bc-cis!raanan, raanan@bc-cis)
dan@prairie.UUCP (05/11/87)
In article <903@bc-cis.UUCP> raanan@bc-cis.UUCP (Raanan Herrmann) writes: > I used the system, I had 2 PCs on the LAN. In general, since it is >a propriety OS, you can not find much software for it, Not as much as Unix or PC-DOS (although you can run most of your DOS software as a task under QNX), but there is a large catalog of third party software available. A good deal of it is vertical market, to be sure. If you want lots of software, the only choice is PC-DOS. >there are many bugs, It's pretty unfair to make this claim. Every system has some bugs. What kind did you find? Compiler bugs? OS crashes? Application software problems? Library glitches? I've worked with QNX quite a bit, and other than the early release of the Basic compiler, I've found about two bugs myself. >the system is not friendly What precisely does "friendly" mean in the this context? It doesn't work just like Unix? I remember being infuriated the first time I used QNX because it didn't work the way I expected it to. This passes, with time. What would make QNX friendly? How about a full-screen mail reader? Hmmm. It's got one of those. Full-screen appointment scheduler? Got one of those. Easy remote login and execution? Easy to use DOS file and task interface? `make' program? What are you comparing it to? >and the documentation is terrible. Compared to what? There are two manuals worth of documentation. Unlike the Unix manuals, I can actually find stuff in them, and understand it once I've found it. What precisely did you want? Everyone is entitled to their opinion. QNX is not perfect. If someone doesn't like it, and they are going to broadcast that fact to an entire continent, it would probably be a good idea, or at least reasonably polite and fair to say why in a more specific way. -- Dan Frank (w9nk) ARPA: dan@db.wisc.edu ATT: (608) 255-0002 (home) UUCP: ... uwvax!prairie!dan (608) 262-4196 (office) SNAILMAIL: 1802 Keyes Ave. Madison, WI 53711-2006