foobar@koko.UUCP (John Fruetel) (04/06/88)
- line eater food (do line eaters still exist?) - Hello guys. I've been contemplating buying Microport 286 for some time so I started reading this news group to get a feel for what the product is really like. Thus far, it seems pretty mediocre. So I'm gonna ask the people that know (you) some questions. I hear a lot of references to bugs. Is it really any worse than the other versions of Unix/Xenix? Everyone has some complaints about their operating system, but just how bad is Microport? Is the 286 version worse than the 386 version? How tough is it to port applications to the 286 version with it's (gag) segment registers? I would definitely prefer to run on a 386, but I ain't got one, so I'll have to live with what I have. I have a no-name AT clone. Is Microport likely to work on it? It seems to run everything else okay (except for QuickC which seems to gag on 40 meg hard drives. Why?). Is anybody else running Microport on one of these "Far East" specials? How much memory is recommended for running the beast? I mean to run it _effectively_, not just to get by. Also, how much disk space does the entire development version eat? Frankly, it the thing really is a dog, I'll spend the extra money for SCO Xenix. If it's just as good, well then, I'll save some bucks and buy Microport. Please e-mail any responses. bcnu j fruetel
foobar@koko.UUCP (John Fruetel) (04/06/88)
In article <799@koko.UUCP> foobar@koko.UUCP (John Fruetel) writes: >- line eater food (do line eaters still exist?) - > >Hello guys. I've been contemplating buying Microport 286 for some time >so I started reading this news group to get a feel for what the product is >really like. Thus far, it seems pretty mediocre. So I'm gonna ask the >people that know (you) some questions. > Whoops, my .signature was missing! Let's try it this way: * The opinions expressed here are John Fruetel * * my own, etc., etc., etc.. Valley Fresh Foods, Inc. * * Turlock, CA * * ..uunet!lll-winken!csustan!foobar *
vandys@hpindda.HP.COM (Andy Valencia) (04/08/88)
I've used 2.3 on my Empac '286 clone w. a Seagate 40Mb drive.
It works fine for a single-user system. The disk really starts
thrashing once you run multiple non-trivial applications. The
floating point support is pretty bad--the system freezes on a number
of simple floating exceptions. However, for your run-of-the-mill
UNIX work, it really is System-V.2, and I appreciate that quite a
bit.
Reading this group gives you the impression that everybody's
always having their system crash. Don't forget, people who aren't
having a problem usually don't post! I've found it to be a quite
reasonable UNIX environment for my own work.
Andy Valencialearn@igloo.UUCP (william vajk) (04/09/88)
In article <799@koko.UUCP>, foobar@koko.UUCP (John Fruetel) writes: > Is anybody else running Microport on one of these "Far East" specials? Igloo runs on just such a beast. > How much memory is recommended for running the beast? I mean to run it > _effectively_, not just to get by. Igloo survived for a long time with 2 megs ram, but the speedup was quite noticable when we expanded to 5.5 megs. This is in a 2 line call in configuration, but don't call during UUCP transfers. Before upgrades including a new getty, a 9600 telebit, and a new uport sio driver, the second line had to be blocked to preclude barfing the uucp. Now, it just commands the system to such an extent that you ( 2nd line caller ) can't get anything accomplished. I don't want to hear from anyone about 'your hardware problems, we experience no problems with our box' as I've put a '286 xenix aboard the same hardware and run a comparison test, with superior (actually acceptable) results running xenix. Why don't I switch ? I only have the bare xenix (runtime) and not only can I not recompile everything we've added in a reasonable timeframe, but there would be a relicensing fee for some parts of the software we run here (in addition to purchasing the balance of the xenix software.) > Frankly, it the thing really is a dog, I'll spend the extra money for > SCO Xenix. If it's just as good, well then, I'll save some bucks and > buy Microport. A year ago, it howled, presently, Bow Wow. If you've time to wait, it should get better. Bill Vajk learn@igloo
steve@nuchat.UUCP (Steve Nuchia) (04/11/88)
From article <7030004@hpindda.HP.COM>, by vandys@hpindda.UUCP: > It works fine for a single-user system. [...] > [...] However, for your run-of-the-mill > UNIX work, it really is System-V.2, and I appreciate that quite a bit. > Reading this group gives you the impression that everybody's > always having their system crash. Don't forget, people who aren't > having a problem usually don't post! I've found it to be a quite > reasonable UNIX environment for my own work. As one of the more vociferous of the squeaky wheels, I felt I should second this comment. As long as you don't push it, it works great. One modem, one drive, one user, it works very well, and its real unix. (until it breaks) For an individual on a budget with typical hackerly or text processing requirements Mircoport V/AT is recommended. It is sad that I can't also recommend it for serious use, but them's the breaks. -- Steve Nuchia | [...] but the machine would probably be allowed no mercy. uunet!nuchat!steve | In other words then, if a machine is expected to be (713) 334 6720 | infallible, it cannot be intelligent. - Alan Turing, 1947