jason@cs.utexas.edu (Jason Martin Levitt) (08/01/90)
In article <1990Jul31.232639.18896@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu> coolidge@cs.uiuc.edu writes: > >My impression....[stuff deleted] >is that Apple is committed to A/UX for the long >haul. They've put a lot of work into 2.0, work that doesn't affect >government procurement requirements for UNIX-compatible systems >(how many government contracts require UNIX with MacOS support? :-)). > I think you've got it backwards, John. Apple wants to deliver *MacOS* solutions, not Unix solutions. The government requires Unix, so Apple delivers an operating system that allows a nearly complete MacOS under Unix. Huzzah! ---Jason jason@cs.utexas.edu (512) 326-9102
coolidge@cassius.cs.uiuc.edu (John Coolidge) (08/02/90)
jason@cs.utexas.edu (Jason Martin Levitt) writes: >In article <1990Jul31.232639.18896@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu> I write: >>My impression....[stuff deleted] >>is that Apple is committed to A/UX for the long >>haul. They've put a lot of work into 2.0, work that doesn't affect >>government procurement requirements for UNIX-compatible systems >>(how many government contracts require UNIX with MacOS support? :-)). >> > I think you've got it backwards, John. Apple wants to deliver >*MacOS* solutions, not Unix solutions. The government requires >Unix, so Apple delivers an operating system that allows a nearly >complete MacOS under Unix. Huzzah! Again, I think this is only partially true. If UNIX was only supposed to be there for purchase requirements and the like, Apple would count on people to reboot the things into MacOS and use those tools. The merger of the two means (I think) that they expect people to get useful work done with both types of tools at the same time. That's how I'm using 2.0, and I suspect that's how lots of people will use it. At the same time, the MacOS is moving, ever so slowly, towards something a lot more like Unix. 7.0 is going to have virtual memory, symlinks, and so forth. I've heard rumors (probably not true, but fun :-)) that 8.0 should have protection and optional preemptive multitasking. At any rate, judging from the types of effort that went into 2.0 and what it appears (from hiring specs and so forth) Apple wants in the development team for the long hall (3.0? :-)), I really think the UNIX part of A/UX is here for the long haul. I expect to see lots of UNIX features added to A/UX in future releases, and lots of support for existing code, as well as further integration of the MacOS into the UNIX world. --John -------------------------------------------------------------------------- John L. Coolidge Internet:coolidge@cs.uiuc.edu UUCP:uiucdcs!coolidge Of course I don't speak for the U of I (or anyone else except myself) Copyright 1990 John L. Coolidge. Copying allowed if (and only if) attributed. You may redistribute this article if and only if your recipients may as well.
vlb@magic.apple.com (Vicki Brown) (08/04/90)
In article <221@gort.cs.utexas.edu> jason@cs.utexas.edu (Jason Martin Levitt) writes: >In article <1990Jul31.232639.18896@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu> coolidge@cs.uiuc.edu >writes: >> >>My impression....[stuff deleted] >>is that Apple is committed to A/UX for the long >>haul. They've put a lot of work into 2.0, work that doesn't affect >>government procurement requirements for UNIX-compatible systems >>(how many government contracts require UNIX with MacOS support? :-)). >> > I think you've got it backwards, John. Apple wants to deliver >*MacOS* solutions, not Unix solutions. The government requires >Unix, so Apple delivers an operating system that allows a nearly >complete MacOS under Unix. Huzzah! IMHO - Apple has a group of Very Good UNIX engineers (not to mention a bunch of related support, documentation, etc people) committed to making A/UX a UNIX that *we* want to use. Yes, we allow a "nearly complete" MacOS. Huzzah is right! Show me any other UNIX system available today with as large and varied a collection of readily available, reasonably low-cost software! A/UX is also quite a complete UNIX, and getting better with every release. If this were just a push-it-out-the-door, Mac look&feel on top of vanilla System V, I'd have been out of here long ago. I think that goes for a lot of the A/UX engineers. As it is, I've been here 4 years, and the group has quadrupled in that time (still growing). We've got support from the higherups to hire more good people, and our budget is *not* shabby :-). Apple wants to deliver *Profitable* solutions, and we can't do that unless they're also good solutions. I came to Apple because I wanted to be part of a nifty UNIX effort. I haven't been disappointed in that regard. High-quality people, and great toys! Vicki Brown A/UX Development Group Apple Computer, Inc. Internet: vlb@apple.com MS 58A, 10440 Bubb Rd. UUCP: {sun,amdahl,decwrl}!apple!vlb Cupertino, CA 95014 USA Ooit'n Normaal Mens Ontmoet? En..., Beviel't? (Did you ever meet a normal person? Did you enjoy it?) Vicki Brown A/UX Development Group Apple Computer, Inc. Internet: vlb@apple.com MS 58A, 10440 Bubb Rd. UUCP: {sun,amdahl,decwrl}!apple!vlb Cupertino, CA 95014 USA Ooit'n Normaal Mens Ontmoet? En..., Beviel't? (Did you ever meet a normal person? Did you enjoy it?)
cory@three.mv.com (Cory Kempf) (08/13/90)
vlb@magic.apple.com (Vicki Brown) writes: >IMHO - >Apple has a group of Very Good UNIX engineers (not to mention a bunch >of related support, documentation, etc people) committed to making >A/UX a UNIX that *we* want to use. Yes, we allow a "nearly complete" >MacOS. Huzzah is right! Show me any other UNIX system available today >with as large and varied a collection of readily available, reasonably >low-cost software! A/UX is also quite a complete UNIX, and getting >better with every release. I have to agree with this. So far, my biggest complaint about A/UX is porting other unix applications to it: Since they include SO MUCH in A/UX, it is often dificult to port things in -- the standard makefiles want either USG or BSD, but neither is right. I usually have to define BSD and then go in and special case a few things back to USG when they don't work. It would be nice if A/UX were closer to BSD unix (or better yet, OSF-1, whenever it gets out) for porting things. Ah well, I guess you can't have everything. It definately beats out all of the 386 solutions that I have seen hands down. It would also be nice though if A/UX allowed access to multiple MacOS partitions (a 300 MB partition is silly -- five 60MB partitions works a lot better) and could support programs that wanted to talk SCSI. AppleShare server capability would also be a plus (maybe in A/UX 2.1 with System 7 extensions :-) ). +C -- Cory Kempf I do speak for the company (sometimes). The EnigamI Co. 603 883 2474 email: cory@three.mv.com, harvard!zinn!three!cory -- Cory Kempf I do speak for the company (sometimes). The EnigamI Co. 603 883 2474 email: cory@three.mv.com, harvard!zinn!three!cory