phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/08/91)
With Sun's release of PC-NFS 3.5, it appears that their product still does not come close to what PC networking should be. Can you chose printers from Windows 3.0 in a user-friendly way, from a menu of servers and their printers? Or do you have to waste hours reading the manual and struggling with cryptic configuration files? When you want to reconfigure, do you have to exit Windows and change the cryptic configuration files again? Do you have to chose options that make no sense, like the OS2 option when you are in Windows? Can you query the printer queue status from a Windows menu? Remove print jobs from a Windows menu?? Are telnet and ftp windows applications, or do they just run in a DOS shell? What does Windows compatible mean? Not much, apparently. Is Sun too stupid to do it right? I don't believe it. Does Sun not know what customers want? That's possible. It appears that no one involved in Sun PC-NFS has ever sat down in front of a PC running Novell and had the user-friendliness of real Windows networking demonstrated to them. It's better than the third alternative: that they don't care what the customers want. "They're just brain dead PC users and don't know how to do things." "Windows is just a passing fad and we're not going to put resources into supporting it." "PC networks like Novell are beneath us to study." You know Sun PC-NFS is not a real PC network when you configure Windows. For "network", you put "none" when using Sun PC-NFS. If the network is the computer, then Sun PC-NFS is a user-hostile computer. I have never had to open a Novell manual and I can do so much more than I could with PC-NFS even after wasting weeks studying the manuals and experimenting with countless cryptic options. At my company, Sun PC-NFS is (currently) the supported option yet none of the people in my group who use Sun PC-NFS can even print from Windows and all of the people who use Novell have no trouble printing from Windows. I'm sure glad I don't have to use Sun PC-NFS anymore. Sun's focus may be growing (now that's a mixed metaphor! I guess growing commitment was too boring.), but I don't consider it satisfactory yet. (I don't speak for the company, obviously, since they're still trying to push it down my throat, this is only my personal opinion, developed after many months of experience.) -- My father is on national television! (Beef Council, Jupiter, Florida)
ian@ukpoit.co.uk (Ian Spare) (03/09/91)
In article <1991Mar7.185009.27239@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >With Sun's release of PC-NFS 3.5, it appears that their product still >does not come close to what PC networking should be. Can you chose I accept that products such as novell ( and why not also mention 3-com , lan- manager etc ) may appear superior to SUN-PCNFS ( and why not mention FTP's version ) but I would point out that far too much of the time user are being sold all-singing/dancing netowrks for PC's which they don't need. Novell et al give a good front-end to PC-LANS but you have to ask whether thats what you really need , I have a suspicion that in many cases users may get better value for money and increased funcionality from a multi-user box running some graphic terminals, Unix with X-terminals seems to be 'only game in town' as far as this goes. Before the entire world sends me mail about their novell/3-com/lan-mgr netowrk let me stress I only belive a proportion of PC LANS are not required NOT all of them !!! Ian * This is , of course, my own opinion and not the policy of the Post Office * -- Ian Spare , iT , Barker Lane , CHESTERFIELD , DERBYS , S40 1DY , GREAT BRITAIN E-mail : ian@ukpoit.uucp - VOICE : +44 246 214296 - FAX : +44 246 214353
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/12/91)
In article <1991Mar9.120940.23851@ukpoit.co.uk> ian@ukpoit.co.uk (Ian Spare) writes: |In article <1991Mar7.185009.27239@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: |>With Sun's release of PC-NFS 3.5, it appears that their product still |>does not come close to what PC networking should be. Can you chose | |I accept that products such as novell ( and why not also mention 3-com , lan- |manager etc ) may appear superior to SUN-PCNFS ( and why not mention FTP's I write about Novell and Sun PC-NFS because I have personal experience with Novell and a previous version of Sun PC-NFS. I have not actually got my hands on 3.5 but from reading their press release and talking to people, it sounds like the Sun PC-NFS group still doesn't understand what PC networks are supposed to be like. |Novell et al give a good front-end to PC-LANS but you have to ask whether |thats what you really need , I have a suspicion that in many cases users |may get better value for money and increased funcionality from a |multi-user box running some graphic terminals, Unix with X-terminals seems Why, so they can use vi and troff? I would guess you haven't a clue about PCs either. That's ok if you're not in the business. But Sun is pretending to be while delivering inadequate solutions. When you install Windows, what network option do you chose if you have Sun PC-NFS. NO NETWORK! -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI) (03/12/91)
From article <1991Mar11.232450.5556@amd.com>, by phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai): > . . . > I write about Novell and Sun PC-NFS because I have personal experience with > Novell and a previous version of Sun PC-NFS. I have not actually got my > hands on 3.5 but from reading their press release and talking to people, > it sounds like the Sun PC-NFS group still doesn't understand what PC > networks are supposed to be like. > From your article, you misunderstand the use of PC-NFS. Its purpose is to allow use of UNIX network (RPC protocol) facilities. Something quite usefull. I use PC-NFS to mount drives from our IBM RISC-6000, SGI IRIS4D's, a VAX, a Tektronix XD88-25, Tektronix XD88-10, HP 900/835SRX Turbo, DEC DecStation/Ultrix, DEC VAXStation (VMS). In addition, I use a laser printer connected to the SGI's. File servers are located all over this network for redundancies. Not bad for not knowing what 'PC' networks are (SUN). I think you should rethink what a network is, 'PC' network does NOT define network. Actually, in my view, Sun's view is a little 'bigger' than a 'PC' network. There are many applications that are not usefull and not feasible on a PC. I can run a simulation in half a day on an SGI, but it takes 2-3 days on a PC. I still want access to the results from a PC though. NFS has so far delivered. It ain't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but it ain't bad either. Tom Hite
barryf@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Barry B. Floyd) (03/12/91)
Debating what a "network" is supposed to be seems besides the point. By all accounts Sun's PC-NFS seems to be deficienct in its compatibility with a Win 3.0 PC environment. A product released as PC compatible and Win 3.0 compatible "should" IMHO be recognized by that environment (i.e. Win 3.0 network configuration should be NFS, NOT "No Network"). Beyond simple installation, I would expect a PC Win 3.0 network product be able to mount virtual drives from within that environment (not exit to DOS reset configuration files then reboot the system). Finally, I would expect such a product to take full advantage of the environments user interface. To the extent that Win 3.0 is relatively new and networking products are relatively complex, it seems reasonable to have to wait a year before having robust and friendly applications in hand that take advantage of both. File sharing, rlogin, ftp, etc. are all now coming to market in reasonable configurations, fairly robust, and beginning to be user friendly. Soon our LAN will be connected to our campus network and Internet. We are using PC's and Win 3.0, the Institute supports NFS. I will soon discover the wonders of making these worlds work together. Though it seems that my options have expanded greatly in the past 6-8 months. None-the-less, let us hope that the next release of Sun's PC-NFS is all but user seductive; or they may find themselves out of this market, given competition from FTP, Novell (imagine!), etc. barry -- +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Barry B. Floyd \\\ barry_floyd@mts.rpi.edu | | Manager Information Systems - HR \\\ usere9w9@rpitsmts | +-Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute--------------------troy, ny 12180-+
ian@ukpoit.co.uk (Ian Spare) (03/12/91)
In article <1991Mar11.232450.5556@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: > >I write about Novell and Sun PC-NFS because I have personal experience with >Novell and a previous version of Sun PC-NFS. I have not actually got my >hands on 3.5 but from reading their press release and talking to people, >it sounds like the Sun PC-NFS group still doesn't understand what PC >networks are supposed to be like. > Possibly so , I don't question the functionality of the products you mention I only observe they may not always be required. >|may get better value for money and increased funcionality from a >|multi-user box running some graphic terminals, Unix with X-terminals seems > >Why, so they can use vi and troff? I would guess you haven't a clue about >PCs either. That's ok if you're not in the business. But Sun is pretending >to be while delivering inadequate solutions. > Aw shucks , caught !!! I am in fact a drainage engineer !! :-) You may be on 'dodgy' ground here with vi and troff , do you disregard post- script etc ?? As for editors well I like vi but there is a lot of choice. Regarding the earlier comment ,ie SUN not understanding PC LANS etc, there is an arguement here that Sun understand exactly what they are about , PC can be excellent local terminal / front-end for other boxes , that said I wouldn't use one ( or let my daughter marry one !! ) :-) Sensibly Sun do sell unix boxes and look at PC-LANS from a different angle. Cheers Ian -- Ian Spare , iT , Barker Lane , CHESTERFIELD , DERBYS , S40 1DY , GREAT BRITAIN E-mail : ian@ukpoit.uucp - VOICE : +44 246 214296 - FAX : +44 246 214353
rhoward@msd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard) (03/13/91)
barryf@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Barry B. Floyd) writes: >Debating what a "network" is supposed to be seems besides the point. By all >accounts Sun's PC-NFS seems to be deficienct in its compatibility with a >Win 3.0 PC environment. A product released as PC compatible and Win 3.0 >compatible "should" IMHO be recognized by that environment (i.e. Win 3.0 >network configuration should be NFS, NOT "No Network"). [then later] >None-the-less, let us hope that the next release of Sun's PC-NFS is all but >user seductive; or they may find themselves out of this market, given >competition from FTP, Novell (imagine!), etc. It seems to me that some of this is not up to Sun! Why didn't Microsoft think to include PC-NFS as an option. (Of course, that would have required some cooperation between Sun/MS, but you can't put everthing at Sun's doorstep.) I think Microsoft only deals with what they feel are the "standard" *PC* networks. Why would they want to support DOS UNIX interoperability? That would cut into their need to sell us OS/2 ... >Beyond simple installation, I would expect a PC Win 3.0 network product be >able to mount virtual drives from within that environment (not exit to DOS >reset configuration files then reboot the system). A Windows 3.0 drive mounter would be nice (as would a windows telnet, mail program, etc.) but I am willing to give Sun a little time. Why not say "I want an integrated PC-NFS/Windows product when Win 3.1 is available!" That gives both parties time to integrate their products. BTW, you don't have to quit Win *or* reboot to mount a drive. Just run NFSCONF as a DOS application and off you go... (I do it all the time). Robert -- | Robert L. Howard | Georgia Tech Research Institute | | rhoward@msd.gatech.edu | MATD Laboratory | | (404) 528-7165 | Atlanta, Georgia 30332 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | "Reality is showing us that perhaps we should do with nuclear | | power the same thing Keloggs is advocating for Corn Flakes - | | Discover it again for the first time." -- John De Armond |
ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) (03/13/91)
In article <29#=N#}@rpi.edu> barryf@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Barry B. Floyd) writes: >Debating what a "network" is supposed to be seems besides the point. By all >accounts Sun's PC-NFS seems to be deficienct in its compatibility with a >Win 3.0 PC environment. A product released as PC compatible and Win 3.0 >compatible "should" IMHO be recognized by that environment (i.e. Win 3.0 >network configuration should be NFS, NOT "No Network"). Isn't this a problem with Microsoft Windows rather than with PC-NFS? I think it has (atleast in part) to do with Microsoft's strategic distaste for Sun as a company -- you won't find a single program written by Microsoft for a Sun machine. It's important for Microsoft profits to not support Unix/NFS in any way. >None-the-less, let us hope that the next release of Sun's PC-NFS is all but >user seductive; or they may find themselves out of this market, given >competition from FTP, Novell (imagine!), etc. What is this competition like? So far, I know of only one good competitor to PC-NFS, this is Beame and Whiteside. -- _______________________________________________________________________________ Ajay Shah, (213)734-3930, ajayshah@usc.edu The more things change, the more they stay insane. _______________________________________________________________________________
kv56962@tut.fi (V{{r{nen Kari) (03/13/91)
> When you install Windows, what network option do you chose if you have > Sun PC-NFS. NO NETWORK! Well, you can use Windows 3.0 with PC-NFS right now! I'm not saying it is perfect (one has to use the OS/2 style printing and all disks from A: to lastdrive will be shown in windows even if there's not really anything 'in' that drive) but it is usable... We've been mostly satisfied with PC-NFS (we are using Sun's one). I would, however, like to know what advantages there are in Novell and other 'pure' PC networking softwares compared to PC-NFS. Just out of curiosity... And no flamewars, please.. :-) Yours, Kari Vaaranen Tampella Papertech Oy Tampere, FINLAND email: kjv@tampella.fi or kv56962@cs.tut.fi -- SO LONG AND THANKS FOR ALL THE FISH (The dolphins) Kari Vaaranen Tampere University of Technology Majakkakatu 30, kv56962@tut.fi SF-33410 Tampere, FINLAND (These opinions are mine and mine ONLY!)
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/13/91)
In article <1991Mar12.050857.24535@ccad.uiowa.edu> cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI) writes: |> hands on 3.5 but from reading their press release and talking to people, |> it sounds like the Sun PC-NFS group still doesn't understand what PC |> networks are supposed to be like. | |From your article, you misunderstand the use of PC-NFS. Its purpose is to |allow use of UNIX network (RPC protocol) facilities. Something quite Oh, is that what it is? Too bad Sun forgot to tell the networking people at my company. They want to force all PC users to run (deficient) Sun PC-NFS. Barf. At least you admit that (deficient) Sun PC-NFS is not a real PC network. -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/13/91)
In article <rhoward.668798209@romeo> rhoward@msd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard) writes: |It seems to me that some of this is not up to Sun! Why didn't Microsoft |think to include PC-NFS as an option. (Of course, that would have Win3 knows about 9 different networks out of the box. You certainly can't say MS didn't show any effort in supporting networks. If Sun really cared about PC networking, they would have looked at something like emulating the Novell API. This would have given them a lot of mileage. But they didn't. Sun PC-NFS is more like a neat hack for Unix lovers that should have stayed in the labs. Unfortunately it made it out into the marketplace to be inflicted on helpless PC users. And to see Sun go around bragging about their great networks really galls me. |Why would they want to support DOS |UNIX interoperability? That would cut into their need to sell us |OS/2 ... Do you have any support for this, or are you just making up nasty lies at other people's expense? |A Windows 3.0 drive mounter would be nice (as would a windows telnet, |mail program, etc.) but I am willing to give Sun a little time. Why How much time do they need? Win3 has been out for about 10 months now. If Sun were serious about the PC market, they would have been in the Win3 beta program and had as much as 18 to 24 months to get ready for Win3. Of course, all this assumes you are really trying to be competitive in the PC market, instead of just peddling a cute but only partially useful hack. The problem is this crippled hack is preventing some users from running the solution that really meets their needs, because Sun offers it as a PC network and management believes Sun instead of their users. -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
craick@titan.trl.oz (John Craick) (03/13/91)
The debate about PC-NFS "deficiencies" is interesting in several
respects and it seems there may well be an outbreak of tribal warfare on
the issue. I wonder, incidentally, why the Windows/PC-NFS problem is
seen as "belonging" to Sun as opposed to Microsoft.
With respect, I'd like to reinforce someone's previous point that one of
the most important questions is actually what sort of network services &
facilities will best meet the needs of users given their particular
tasks. Is a Unix network, a PC network or some combination of these the
best choice ? Is the user, and, indeed, their organization when it comes
down to it, best served by Unix services and applications or by PC
s&a's ? PC-NFS is not perfect, of course, but it does allow powerful
mixed combinations to be used.
Just for the record, using PC-NFS 3.0 or thereabouts, plus 386 class
PC's with plenty of memory and without any configuration switching, you
CAN have :
(1) MS Windows in 386 enhanced mode
(2) Telnet sessions run on Unix hosts, inside or outside Windows, with at
least VT 100 terminal capabilities - i.e. Vi to your hearts content.
(3) FTP sessions from DOS, inside Windows or on a Unix host
(4) Network mounted DOS disks on which DOS application data can be
readily created, accessed and stored and from which many (tho' not all)
DOS applications can actually be run.
(5) Network mounted DOS printers (LPT2 ...) - but see below
(6) 585 Kbyte usable memory space under DOS
(7) About 560 Kbyte usable memory in DOS windows under Windows.
To me, all this seems a pretty powerful combination but there are still some
problems areas.
Firstly, printing. So far, tho' netmounted (postcript) LPTs work fine
under DOS, I haven't persuaded Windows to take any notice of them - a
considerable nuisance but work-roundable (!). Maybe I haven't found the
right recipe yet, tho' others suggest they have. Also, since all this is
a "no network" as far as WINDOWS is concerned, there's no direct means
of inspecting or manipulating the network print queue. You can, however,
telnet access the Unix print host and operate to some extent on the
print queue there.
Secondly, at present in my environment, multitasking & task switching,
normally available under Windows, seem a little wobbly when network
operations are involved. Maybe I haven't found the right recipes and
settings or maybe there are some basic problems. It would be nice if the
new PC-NFS bits came with some .pif files.
Overall, there isn't yet any single, ideal and perfect operating/working
environment and there probably won't ever be. Even the "old" PC-NFS was
quite a useful tool and things seem to be evolving in several useful
ways. Finally, I'd suggest that, while critical debate is probably
useful, tribal warfare and dismissal of this, that or the other style of
network or this or that company or package isn't likely to help anyone
very much.
John Craick
(j.craick@trl.oz.au)ajayshah@almaak.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) (03/13/91)
In article <1991Mar12.231950.14828@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >And to see Sun go around bragging about their great networks >really galls me. Sun has done a fantastic job in reaching for truly seamless networking in the Unix world. Today's Unixes are better in network-awareness and transparency -- hassle free -- than any PC/Mac system I've seen. A better-thoughtout, mature and debugged OS/2 might someday have been somewhere close, but totally that's out of the running now. Hacks on MS-DOS and the 8086 memory model are a pain in the butt. I use a 386 box and the amount of juggling going into getting OS functions up and running is a nightmare. SunOS 4.1.1 runs today on machines of today and delivers the goods. Machines running SunOS can talk with alien hardware running Unix with ease. PC-NFS is a small part of this game. The Unix market has a life of it's own, you know. *I* agree with you that PC-NFS is not great; I prefer Beame and Whiteside products for the purpose. I'm just saying that Sun's work on networking is truly incredible and they deserve bragging about it. Bill Joy is a genius and a visionary, and there aren't too many like him. As of today, there is > 10 years of work by high quality hackers (not the kinds of people Microsoft hires off campuses) going into SunOS; it's not easy replicating it overnight. That's the major lesson of the OS/2 experience to me: a company which is good at writing word processors and passable writing compilers is guaranteed to be a disaster writing operating systems. They're a different game altogether. MHO obviously! -- _______________________________________________________________________________ Ajay Shah, (213)734-3930, ajayshah@usc.edu The more things change, the more they stay insane. _______________________________________________________________________________
cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI) (03/13/91)
From article <1991Mar12.231950.14828@amd.com>, by phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai): > In article <rhoward.668798209@romeo> > rhoward@msd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard) writes: > > And to see Sun go around bragging about their great networks > really galls me. Evidently You need to look at The banking and stock business. Sun Dominates these areas. > Of course, all this assumes you are really trying to be competitive in > the PC market, instead of just peddling a cute but only partially > useful hack. The problem is this crippled hack is preventing some users > from running the solution that really meets their needs, because Sun > offers it as a PC network and management believes Sun instead of their > users. hmmm.... Lets play numbers. There are around 50,000,000 PC's out there (numbers from variuos magazines. When I finish +-10,000,000 won't matter much). Assume now that even 0.1% have the desire to do PC to UNIX networking. Now that works out to around 50,000 PC's. 50,000 * $300 = $15,000,000. No real need to be competitive. Just sell a minor percentage. So, since some of the users need just that 'cute but only partially usefull hack', it all makes good sense. Nobody 'forced' anyone to purchase PC-NFS anyway. Matter of fact, I would prefer NOVELL and some of those others, but they don't talk to UNIX (at all, or miserably), even less of a solution to some. Lets not play war here. The idea behind this network mail (not NOVELL by the way) is to locate solutions. There is good and bad in every solution. Tom Hite
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/14/91)
In article <2799@trlluna.trl.oz> craick@titan.trl.oz (John Craick) writes: |Firstly, printing. So far, tho' netmounted (postcript) LPTs work fine |under DOS, I haven't persuaded Windows to take any notice of them - a |considerable nuisance but work-roundable (!). Maybe I haven't found the Obviously, the thing that is most important to me (printing) is of very little importance to you. Therefore, the thing that is of little concern to me (file servers) is probably very important to you. I don't care about file servers because I have a big disk. I got a big disk because they are cheap and more reliable, and less hassle than file servers (were in my company). Perhaps you know how it is. If you have more than 50 megabytes they start whining about how you're a disk hog. My friend has over 330 megabytes at home. I only have 180 megabytes at home. I couldn't imagine gobbling up 180 megs off the file server. How many of you could? -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/14/91)
In article <KV56962.91Mar12193559@kaarne.tut.fi> kv56962@tut.fi (V{{r{nen Kari) writes: |would, however, like to know what advantages there are in Novell and |other 'pure' PC networking softwares compared to PC-NFS. Just out of You can print to an HP Laserjet IIIsi over the Ethernet directly, something Sun PC-NFS could never do, since the LJIIISi talks Novell. The IIISi has a faster print engine (17 PPM), a RISC processor, and a direct Ethernet connection. A beta site said they found some jobs printed 75 times as fast as a LJ II. See the current PC Week. You can also print to the Intel Netport devices. Again, they speak Novell only. Doesn't Sun talk about being standards based? Novell is THE standard in PC networks. With regard to Windows, a real PC network lets you inspect the print queues, pause, resume, and delete jobs FROM A MENU. You can configure the printers, select servers, and server queues FROM A MENU. A crippled network like PC-NFS requires you to manipulate configuration files so cryptic most users never figure it out. User-hostile. PC-NFS requires you to choose a name for your machine. One user chose the name of our server. He wasn't malicious, just confused. He crashed the server. Now, the unix bigots will say "stupid user". That attitude is a big part of the problem. But I don't know if it is possible to make the unix bigots realize that. Most unix bigots would never believe this kind of problem could be solved, should be solved, and would not try. -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI) (03/14/91)
From article <1991Mar13.174927.14249@amd.com>, by phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai): > Obviously, the thing that is most important to me (printing) is of very > little importance to you. Therefore, the thing that is of little > concern to me (file servers) is probably very important to you. > > I don't care about file servers because I have a big disk. I got a big > disk because they are cheap and more reliable, and less hassle than > file servers (were in my company). Perhaps you know how it is. If you > have more than 50 megabytes they start whining about how you're a disk > hog. My friend has over 330 megabytes at home. I only have 180 megabytes > at home. I couldn't imagine gobbling up 180 megs off the file server. > How many of you could? > My staff chews up disk space like mad. Me too. We just get more space, but find it more usefull where our simulations are run (UNIX machines). I regularly chew up around 300 Meg for my simulations. These are around 30-50 Meg apiece. I usually have between 5-7 contracts open at once. So this is the problem, and the need for redundancy. Actually, printing is highly important to me for RFQ responses to the Feds. Somebody mentioned earlier that they were interested in printing from Windows with PC-NFS. I use an SGI as the pcnfsd server and have no problems (even in 386 enhanced mode). I use the LPT1.OS2 port in the control printer setup. This is Sun's suggestion. It seems to work well. Give it a shot. Tom Hite |----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |Tom Hite | The views expressed by me | |Manager, Product development | are mine, not necessarily | |CADSI (Computer Aided Design Software Inc. | the views of CADSI. | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI) (03/14/91)
From article <1991Mar13.180625.14540@amd.com>, by phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai): > > You can print to an HP Laserjet IIIsi over the Ethernet directly, > something Sun PC-NFS could never do, since the LJIIISi talks Novell. ... > You can also print to the Intel Netport devices. Again, they speak > Novell only. Hmmm... I wonder if we could find a solution??? If you set a port as raw on the UNIX side, would this printer then work??? I have printed to other binary devices, maybe... > With regard to Windows, a real PC network lets you inspect the > print queues, pause, resume, and delete jobs FROM A MENU. You can > configure the printers, select servers, and server queues > FROM A MENU. A crippled network like PC-NFS requires you to > manipulate configuration files so cryptic most users never figure > it out. User-hostile. Actually PC-NFS has a menu driven interface to manage these files. > > PC-NFS requires you to choose a name for your machine. One user > chose the name of our server. He wasn't malicious, just confused. > He crashed the server. Hmmmm... could this have been an old PC-NFS version. I had three machines called the same thing for a time when we screwed up. The SGI server never crashed, but PC-NFS did complain a lot about breaking laws of licensing and whatnot on the PC screens across the network. Tom Hite |----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |Tom Hite | The views expressed by me | |Manager, Product development | are mine, not necessarily | |CADSI (Computer Aided Design Software Inc. | the views of CADSI. | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/14/91)
In article <1991Mar13.191509.23698@ccad.uiowa.edu> cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI) writes: |Somebody mentioned earlier that they were interested in printing |from Windows with PC-NFS. I use an SGI as the pcnfsd server and have no |problems (even in 386 enhanced mode). I use the LPT1.OS2 port in the |control printer setup. This is Sun's suggestion. It seems to work well. How do you check the queue? You telnet to the SGI. How do you pause, resume, or delete a job? You telnet to the SGI. (actually, you probably can't pause or resume as an ordinary user, only su can use lpc) How do you choose the server and the printer? Not from a Windows menu, like you can with Novell. How do you find out the name of the server(s) and the name of the printer(s)? Under Sun PC-NFS you have to know them. Under Novell, there's a menu which tells you the choices you have and you just pick the one you want. Novell is user-friendly. Sun PC-NFS isn't. Let's not talk about printer timeouts with Sun PC-NFS... -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/14/91)
In article <1991Mar13.192701.21148@ccad.uiowa.edu> cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI) writes: |> You can print to an HP Laserjet IIIsi over the Ethernet directly, |> something Sun PC-NFS could never do, since the LJIIISi talks Novell. |... |> You can also print to the Intel Netport devices. Again, they speak |> Novell only. | |Hmmm... I wonder if we could find a solution??? If you set a port |as raw on the UNIX side, would this printer then work??? I have printed |to other binary devices, maybe... You don't understand. These devices talk Novell. No TCP/IP at all. Setting raw is something you do with RS-232, I believe. Which you can do with the LJIIIsi (but not the Intel Inport), but then instead of 10,000,000 bits per second, you're down to 9,600 bits per second. And only the physically attached host can control it. If the host goes down or runs out of spool space or some bozo fires up a zillion NFS copies and makes the host go catatonic, too bad. With the LJ IIIsi, any Novell node can use it as long as the Ethernet cable isn't shorted out or something drastic like that. A big improvement in reliability. |Actually PC-NFS has a menu driven interface to manage these files. But not a Windows menu. And it won't give you a choice of servers and printers to use, you have to know their names already. Another example of not being user friendly. |> PC-NFS requires you to choose a name for your machine. One user |> chose the name of our server. He wasn't malicious, just confused. |> He crashed the server. | |Hmmmm... could this have been an old PC-NFS version. I had three machines |called the same thing for a time when we screwed up. The SGI server |never crashed, but PC-NFS did complain a lot about breaking laws of |licensing and whatnot on the PC screens across the network. This happened pretty recently. -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
leoh@hardy.hdw.csd.harris.com (Leo Hinds) (03/14/91)
I am not sure that this is merely coincidental, but this "what is a REAL network" seems to have sprouted (again) after an announcement by sun that they have improved their pc-nfs product to be windows friendly (or something to that effect) ... unfortunately I do not have the announcement (it's at work & I am home), but it did mention win3/nfs improvements addressing SOME of the complaints voiced in this thread. I believe (and I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong) that the availability date for pc-nfs version 3xx PRE_DATED win3, therefore it would be UNREASONABLE to expect it to work as is. I do agree with a previous poster who said that sun/microsoft should have communicated better & therefore had support already built-in, or at least come to market with a solution shortly thereafter. But given SUN's history (ever seen the _thicker_than_a Manhattan_phone_book_ bug listing?) a little time was required to get the wheels in motion. Another posting also compared the % of DOS based networks that use NFS derivatives vs other solutions such as the (expensive) NOVELL, and quite honestly if I was uSoft, I would try & cover the greatest percentage with the least effort & pick up the rest later (or have it picked up by the parties left out) ... like they do for many other parts of windows (printer/graphics cards). But now that SUN has addressed some of the problems, one should at least USE the updated package before jumping into the throws of this emotional debate. Now I will heed my own advice & wait for the update to arrive ... leoh@hdw.csd.harris.com Leo Hinds (305)973-5229 Gfx ... gfx ... :-) whfg orpnhfr V "ebg"grq zl fvtangher svyr lbh guvax V nz n creireg ?!!!!!!? ... znlor arkg gvzr
jlk@siesoft.co.uk (Jim Kissel) (03/14/91)
In article <1991Mar12.231950.14828@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >In article <rhoward.668798209@romeo> >rhoward@msd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard) writes: >|It seems to me that some of this is not up to Sun! Why didn't Microsoft >|think to include PC-NFS as an option. (Of course, that would have > >Win3 knows about 9 different networks out of the box. You certainly >can't say MS didn't show any effort in supporting networks. > >If Sun really cared about PC networking, they would have looked at >something like emulating the Novell API. This would have given them a >lot of mileage. But they didn't. Sun PC-NFS is more like a neat hack >for Unix lovers that should have stayed in the labs. Unfortunately >it made it out into the marketplace to be inflicted on helpless PC users. > >And to see Sun go around bragging about their great networks >really galls me. > >|Why would they want to support DOS >|UNIX interoperability? That would cut into their need to sell us >|OS/2 ... > >Do you have any support for this, or are you just making up nasty >lies at other people's expense? > There are lies, damn lies, statistics and standards. Perhaps you haven't heard of X/Open, which is supported by 19 of the bigest computer manufactures in the world. As for interoperability between DOS and UNIX, not only are people interested, X/Open has a working group dedicated to PC <-> Unix interworking and oddly enough one of the major outside contributers to this group is Microsoft. People are interested in PC <-> Unix interworking and so in Microsoft!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jim Kissel Telephone +44 344 863 222 Siemens Nixdorf Information Systems 344 850 461 (Direct line) Systems Development Group Fax +44 344 850 452 Siemens Nixdorf House Domain jlk@siesoft.co.uk Oldbury, Bracknell, Berkshire j.kissel@xopen.co.uk RG12 4FZ Great Britain UUCP ....{ukc,athen}!siesoft!jlk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kjv@kapakala.tampella.fi (V{{r{nen Kari) (03/14/91)
> You can print to an HP Laserjet IIIsi over the Ethernet directly, Well, that is obvious. PC-NFS (or UNIX) can't print to a network laser that doesn't talk TCP/IP. At least, if there is not a Novell-talking driver installed on the PC-NFS -server.. I suppose there isn't such a beast available yet... :-) > The IIISi has a faster print engine (17 PPM), a RISC processor, I would, myself, prefer the QMS ImageServer, which is a 20 ppm, TCP/IP speaking postscript laser... (And costs like hell too. :-) > You can also print to the Intel Netport devices. Again, they speak > Novell only. We are using 3Com's TCP/IP speaking terminal servers as well as DECservers by Digital. We have several lasers (Canon, HP, QMS) attached to them and it all works well... We have about 150 PCs in our PC-NFS network. We have about 40 lasers. We have a Sun 4/370 working as a PC-NFS server (its mainly a NFS-server for our Sun and DEC workstations but it handles those PCs too). We have now 1.1 GB diskspace as a network disk for PCs (btw this disk is backup'd *every* night!!!) and we are planning to buy another 2.5 GB disk for this purpose... Tampella Group's one other subsidiary has about 200 PCs networked with PC-NFS etc. The point is that we have a not-too-small system here. Every one of our users must be able to use our bigger systems running in our VAXen and Suns. I am *not* convinced that we could do as much with a 'pure' PC-network like Novell. At least, not yet.. :-) (Btw, when I say 'pure' PC-network I mean networks which have PCs as servers.) > PC-NFS requires you to choose a name for your machine. One user > chose the name of our server. He wasn't malicious, just confused. > He crashed the server. That's funny. Nodes in TCP/IP networking are identified with IP-number. If you don't generate unique numbers, you ask for trouble... The name is important only in email and in allowing mounts or lpr-usage for a node. The name can be different from PCs point of view and PC-NFS servers point of view. The PC-NFS server has to be configured by someone, who knows what he/she does. It's not everyones job. And I really don't think it should be either.. :-) We have a PC-manager who installs all our PCs. So, we haven't had to care about ignorant users too much. > Now, the unix bigots will say "stupid user". That attitude is > a big part of the problem. But I don't know if it is possible > to make the unix bigots realize that. Most unix bigots would > never believe this kind of problem could be solved, should > be solved, and would not try. Are you suggesting that Novell is *so* easy that even the most ignorant users can set up the whole network and manage it properly? If that's true, I've got to start thinking differently about PC-NFS and other PC-networks. Yours, Kari Vaaranen -- Kari Vaaranen * (So long, and thanks for all the fish!) Tampella Papertech Oy * email INTERNET : kjv@tampella.fi P.O.BOX 267, SF-33101 * Phone internat. : +358 31 2412434 Tampere, FINLAND * Telefax internat.: +358 31 115440
hassler@logdis1.hq.aflc.af.mil (Barry D. Hassler) (03/15/91)
In article <1991Mar13.180625.14540@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >In article <KV56962.91Mar12193559@kaarne.tut.fi> kv56962@tut.fi (V{{r{nen Kari) writes: ... >something Sun PC-NFS could never do, since the LJIIISi talks Novell. ... >You can also print to the Intel Netport devices. Again, they speak >Novell only. > >Doesn't Sun talk about being standards based? Novell is THE standard >in PC networks. I must object to this. Simply because a product is widely available does NOT make it a standard. Standards imply widely accessible, public specifications The above products you mention, while extremely attractive, are not viable options in environments where open competition and interoperability are required. > >With regard to Windows, a real PC network lets you inspect the >print queues, pause, resume, and delete jobs FROM A MENU. You can >configure the printers, select servers, and server queues >FROM A MENU. A crippled network like PC-NFS requires you to A "network" allows you to do non of the above. It is the implementation of software ABOVE the network which provides these capabilities. See the axiom about "solving problems at the right level - then you only have to solve them once". Neither Novell "network" or PCNFS "network" provide the above capabilities. Again, it is the implementation of software utilizing those network services. ... > >Now, the unix bigots will say "stupid user". That attitude is >a big part of the problem. But I don't know if it is possible >to make the unix bigots realize that. Most unix bigots would >never believe this kind of problem could be solved, should >be solved, and would not try. I'm a "UNIX bigot" I suppose, but I won't say stupid user. From your point of view (assuming you are a "user", and not a systems-type), the entire issue *is* part of the network, as it should be. The reality of the situation though is that they are completely separate. Your "system experts" should be providing this type of information to you and helping to ensure that you have the right set of tools to satisfy your needs. One of the nice things about NFS, is that it ISN'T limited to Unix (and neither is Novell limited to PCs). NFS is available on just about any platform you can name. Novell also works with UNIX, but as someone else pointed out, its usefullness on that platform may be questionable (I haven't used it myself on UNIX, so I can't say personally). IT MAY BE TRUE that PCNFS does not satisfy your needs, but that isn't a reflection upon PCNFS itself, but instead on those companies that have chosen to implement it. By the way, I have no vested interest in NFS. I do have an interest in assuring my clients are provided the best solution to their requirements. ------- Barry D. Hassler hassler@logdis1.hq.aflc.af.mil Networking and Systems Consultant (513) 257-4499 (WPAFB) Control Data Corporation DSN 787-4499 Integrated Information Systems "It is better to be blind than to be able to see but have no vision." - Helen Keller
aronb@gkcl.ists.ca (Aron Burns) (03/15/91)
In article <1991Mar13.180625.14540@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >In article <KV56962.91Mar12193559@kaarne.tut.fi> kv56962@tut.fi (V{{r{nen Kari) writes: >|would, however, like to know what advantages there are in Novell and >|other 'pure' PC networking softwares compared to PC-NFS. Just out of > >You can print to an HP Laserjet IIIsi over the Ethernet directly, >something Sun PC-NFS could never do, since the LJIIISi talks Novell. > At recent presentation, an HP rep indicated that the IIIsi would talk IP shortly. It's a great concept, as you bypass the spooler on the file server. I don't know how it would work with PC-NFS (probably not, until PC-NFS was changed to send output to an IP address directly). [...] >Doesn't Sun talk about being standards based? Novell is THE standard >in PC networks. Show us the RFC :-) >configure the printers, select servers, and server queues >FROM A MENU. A crippled network like PC-NFS requires you to >manipulate configuration files so cryptic most users never figure Not at all. Run NFSCONF. It changes the configuration files FROM A MENU and has pretty colours as an added bonus. >PC-NFS requires you to choose a name for your machine. One user >chose the name of our server. He wasn't malicious, just confused. >He crashed the server. so who let him configure his own machine? Who could expect a user to understand an IP address and pick a machine name? You do this once on initial install. >Now, the unix bigots will say "stupid user". That attitude is >a big part of the problem. But I don't know if it is possible >to make the unix bigots realize that. Most unix bigots would >never believe this kind of problem could be solved, should >be solved, and would not try. See my last paragraph. I don't think the user was stupid. >The government is not your mother. >The government doesn't love you. This we agree on. Aaron Burns "Nothing I say on the net is binding aronb@gkcl.ists.ca to our corporation" Toronto, Ontario "Life is a forge, and the purest metal (416)392-4310 comes from the hottest fire"
etxsral@california.ericsson.se (Lars Nilsson) (03/15/91)
Here is my opinion about PC-NFS versus Novell: PC-NFS,PC-TCP etc is not meant to be a full-blown PC-network. PC-NFS is a way to use PC's towards an Unix-network. PC-NFS and PC-TCP is configured in a more unix-like way this makes it easier for the Unix-system managers to configure the PC's If you want a PC -- PC network then buy a PC-lan as Novell. If you want a PC -- UNIX network then buy PC-nfs or similar(I like PC-TCP). /Lars Nilsson -- Lars Nilsson Ericsson Telecom AB , Stockholm - Sweden E-mail: etxsral@california.ericsson.se Fidonet: Lars Nilsson @ 2:201/108.7
dbl@h.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu (David Lawson,,2933607,5999662) (03/15/91)
From article <1991Mar12.231950.14828@amd.com>, by phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai): > If Sun really cared about PC networking, they would have looked at > something like emulating the Novell API. This would have given them a This is just my guess but I bet Sun cares about Sun networking and if you happen to have a PC in your Unix shop then you'll probably want some files off the unix boxes, maybe mount some drives, that seems to be what PC-NFS is facilitating. > And to see Sun go around bragging about their great networks > really galls me. Have you ever worked on a network of Sun workstations and servers, believe it's worth bragging about. > Of course, all this assumes you are really trying to be competitive in > the PC market, instead of just peddling a cute but only partially > useful hack. The problem is this crippled hack is preventing some users NFS a hack, ;) if you can stop frothing at the mouth for a moment consider this: PC-NFS is a real trick for people who have unix machines, in particular Suns, around and want to mount Sun drives and share files to their PCs. Just because someone is forcing you to use it doesn't mean there aren't people who get a good bit of utility from the product. I think this whole argument is just another example of the baby-duck syndrome/xenophobia that seems to overcome people when they use a computer. You know, if it's different, it's wrong! These opinions are my own and are not related to any school or business that I am associated with. Dave Lawson
jmorriso@twix.ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) (03/15/91)
In article <1991Mar13.180625.14540@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >In article <KV56962.91Mar12193559@kaarne.tut.fi> kv56962@tut.fi (V{{r{nen Kari) writes: >You can print to an HP Laserjet IIIsi over the Ethernet directly, >something Sun PC-NFS could never do, since the LJIIISi talks Novell. > >You can also print to the Intel Netport devices. Again, they speak >Novell only. > I'd really like to see this. What on earth do you mean by speaking NOvell? Novell is software. It uses certain hardware standards to shuffle files around. Why do you say an HP printer only supports ONE network, when there are at least half a dozen PC networks out in PC land?? >Doesn't Sun talk about being standards based? Novell is THE standard >in PC networks. > Correction: THE standard in _IBM COMPPATIBLE_ Networks. I really don't think many MAC or other users have any higher opinion of Novell than they do of NFS, >With regard to Windows, a real PC network lets you inspect the >print queues, pause, resume, and delete jobs FROM A MENU. You can >configure the printers, select servers, and server queues >FROM A MENU. A crippled network like PC-NFS requires you to >manipulate configuration files so cryptic most users never figure >it out. User-hostile. I agree that NFS should live up to the hopes and desires of most Windows users. As for crippled, I really beg to differ! I can speak from the (relatively) unique position of having used IBM PC's and Sun workstations almost equally. Since we are at a poor humble university, we don't have fancy word-processors and spreadsheets. What we get has been site-licensed to us. So I find myself whith a strong dislike of: vi, troff, emacs, TeX, etc. So called "hacker friendly" software. On the other hand, what we do get would be ridiculous on a PC. Things like Maple 5, or MAthematica. Basically anything that needs a STABLE network with REAL multitasking and REAL virtual memory. It's funny to observe Unix hacks who think that anything non-unix is a toy (although they are often right). It's funny to observe PC hacks who think they know evrything and that they are "gurus". These are people with 20 000 "utility" programs cluttering their disks to compensate for what MS-DOS can't handle! It all ends up being what you use your macine for, and how you wan't to do it. I'll give Windows infinitely more credit than MIT X windows for being an easy, consistent, and fairly well thought out interface. (MIT X has never heard of printers. EVery program just figures out how to print any old way). Although a NeXT with X features would be something amazing. It seems like certain PC users are incredibly bitter about Unix people, which I could understand if it were DEC, or IBM they were bitter about. But here this leads me to believe they have never used Unix. At best their experience has been an inconvenience with non-WYSIWIG ways of doing things. Basically cosmetic, which is NOT to say trivial: Unix could use a really slick, coherent face-lift. But I'll give unix the upper hand for most things anyway, because MS-DOS is not an operating system; it is a glorified program loader, one step better than a ROM bootstrap loader. In two years of heavy Sun use, and light PC use, I HAVE NEVER LOST A FILE on a Sun network (that I didn't nuke myself), whereas I have lost and corrupted more files on IBMs.(we have around 2-3 Giga bytes of disk space shared by about 100 users, on distributed servers, and on not one but TWO radically different computer architectures. Try THAT on Novell!!!)
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/15/91)
In article <2623@travis.csd.harris.com> leoh@hardy.hdw.csd.harris.com (Leo Hinds) writes: |I am not sure that this is merely coincidental, but this "what is a REAL |network" seems to have sprouted (again) after an announcement by sun that |they have improved their pc-nfs product to be windows friendly (or something I have read "windows compatible" in a few places. I wonder what a real windows application like excel is. I wonder what compatible is supposed to mean when Sun says it. |I believe (and I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong) that the |availability date for pc-nfs version 3xx PRE_DATED win3, therefore it would |be UNREASONABLE to expect it to work as is. Win3 was released May 1990. Beta testers had it quite a bit earlier. Now PC-NFS 3.5 is out and it is STILL "NO NETWORK". I think that is certainly slower than it could have been, if Sun did care about the PC market. |Another posting also compared the % of DOS based networks that use NFS |derivatives vs other solutions such as the (expensive) NOVELL, and quite |honestly if I was uSoft, I would try & cover the greatest percentage with |the least effort & pick up the rest later (or have it picked up by the Better yet, Sun COULD give PC-NFS Novell like interfaces. Just imagine the leverage they could get out of that. But they'd have to care about the PC market to consider such a thing. And getting Unix people to take PCs seriously can be very difficult. Unix people like to think that they know THE RIGHT WAY and that PC users have room temperature IQs so the PC users should just do things the Unix way. You want to check the printer queue, just telnet to the Sun. |But now that SUN has addressed some of the problems, one should at least USE |the updated package before jumping into the throws of this emotional debate. I think I know enough about 3.5 to have a solid basis for my conclusions. If I have reached any incorrect conclusions I would appreciate corrections from the people who do know. -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/15/91)
In article <KJV.91Mar14122529@kapakala.tampella.fi> kjv@kapakala.tampella.fi (V{{r{nen Kari) writes: | |> You can print to an HP Laserjet IIIsi over the Ethernet directly, | |Well, that is obvious. PC-NFS (or UNIX) can't print to a network laser |that doesn't talk TCP/IP. At least, if there is not a Novell-talking |driver installed on the PC-NFS -server.. I suppose there isn't such a |beast available yet... :-) Actually, there is. You can get Portable Netware to run on Unix machines. I include this example to show you that Novell is considered to be a more important Ethernet protocol than TCP/IP by HP. And you probably know how important HP is in the laser printer market. HP has a pretty good idea of what they are doing. |> The IIISi has a faster print engine (17 PPM), a RISC processor, | |I would, myself, prefer the QMS ImageServer, which is a 20 ppm, TCP/IP |speaking postscript laser... (And costs like hell too. :-) The IIIsi is less than $6,000 list price. |The point is that we have a not-too-small system here. Every one of |our users must be able to use our bigger systems running in our VAXen |and Suns. I am *not* convinced that we could do as much with a 'pure' |PC-network like Novell. At least, not yet.. :-) (Btw, when I say I'm not saying Novell is for everyone. And that PC-NFS has no value. I am saying PC-NFS could learn a lot about how to fit into a PC environment from Novell. |> PC-NFS requires you to choose a name for your machine. One user |> chose the name of our server. He wasn't malicious, just confused. |> He crashed the server. | |That's funny. Nodes in TCP/IP networking are identified with |IP-number. If you don't generate unique numbers, you ask for This is the point. Unix people can't even imagine that this problem might not exist in other systems. |Are you suggesting that Novell is *so* easy that even the most |ignorant users can set up the whole network and manage it properly? If I'm saying installing Novell on a client is much easier than PC-NFS. The server does require more attention, but Suns are not something the most ignorant user can run either. -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/16/91)
In article <20171@ists.ists.ca> aronb@gkcl.UUCP (Aron Burns) writes: |>You can print to an HP Laserjet IIIsi over the Ethernet directly, |>something Sun PC-NFS could never do, since the LJIIISi talks Novell. | |At recent presentation, an HP rep indicated that |the IIIsi would talk IP shortly. It's a great concept, as But Novell is first. As you imply, to use TCP/IP with PC-NFS will require double traffic. |>configure the printers, select servers, and server queues |>FROM A MENU. A crippled network like PC-NFS requires you to |>manipulate configuration files so cryptic most users never figure | |Not at all. Run NFSCONF. It changes the configuration files FROM A MENU |and has pretty colours as an added bonus. Sorry, I was talking about Windows and meant Windows menus, not some Sun menu (which you have to run from DOS). |so who let him configure his own machine? Who could expect a user |to understand an IP address and pick a machine name? You do this |once on initial install. And you're missing the point. Unix bigots only know how it is done in Unix and can't imagine other systems having an easier way to do something. In Novell, you don't have to mess with IP addresses or machine names (or Novell addresses). You choose servers (when you want to change) from a menu of available servers. -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/16/91)
In article <1333@h.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu> dbl@h.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu (David Lawson,,2933607,5999662) writes: |This is just my guess but I bet Sun cares about Sun networking and if |you happen to have a PC in your Unix shop then you'll probably want |some files off the unix boxes, maybe mount some drives, that seems to |be what PC-NFS is facilitating. Sun seems to be trying to attract the Windows market. All the PR I've seen concerning PC-NFS 3.5 has spilled a lot of ink about Windows compatibility. But a knowlegable Windows user can easily see that Sun PC-NFS' MS Windows compatibility is at best still underdeveloped. You sound like the kind of guy who would be horrified at the idea of a PC in your Unix shop. How on earth did it sneak in? Can't you throw it in the trash where it belongs? |Have you ever worked on a network of Sun workstations and servers, |believe it's worth bragging about. Sure, I have and I do. And I think the PC-NFS part is pitiful. | NFS a hack, ;) if you can stop frothing at the mouth for a moment |consider this: PC-NFS is a real trick for people who have unix machines, |in particular Suns, around and want to mount Sun drives and share files Especially people who only know the Unix way of doing things. For people used to the MS Windows way of doing things, it's quite another story. |I think this whole argument is just another example of the baby-duck |syndrome/xenophobia that seems to overcome people when they use a computer. |You know, if it's different, it's wrong! Exactly, why is Sun making PC people do Unix things on their PC? Because the Unix folks at Sun don't like PC methods? -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/16/91)
In article <1991Mar14.194005.19662@ericsson.se> etxsral@california.ericsson.se (Lars Nilsson) writes: |Here is my opinion about PC-NFS versus Novell: | |PC-NFS,PC-TCP etc is not meant to be a full-blown PC-network. That's what I've been trying to say. Sun PC-NFS is NO NETWORK in the PC world. |PC-NFS and PC-TCP is configured in a more unix-like way this |makes it easier for the Unix-system managers to configure |the PC's Yeah, who cares about the users? -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/16/91)
In article <1541@fs1.ee.ubc.ca> jmorriso@twix.ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) writes: |I'd really like to see this. What on earth do you mean by speaking NOvell? A PC running Novell can send a print job to the LJIIIsi directly over the Ethernet. |Why do you say an HP printer only supports ONE network, when |there are at least half a dozen PC networks out in PC land?? I say it because that is what HP has done, implemented a Novell speaking laser printer. |I agree that NFS should live up to the hopes and desires of most |Windows users. As for crippled, I really beg to differ! |I can speak from the (relatively) unique position of having used IBM PC's |and Sun workstations almost equally. But have you used Microsoft Windows and Novell? |On the other hand, what we do get would be ridiculous on a PC. Things like |Maple 5, or MAthematica. Basically anything that needs a STABLE network with |REAL multitasking and REAL virtual memory. I'm not familiar with Maple, but I believe Mathematica does run on 386 PCs. MS Windows on a 386 is a pretty good multitasking system and does offer VM. |It's funny to observe Unix hacks who think that anything non-unix is a toy |(although they are often right). |It's funny to observe PC hacks who think they know evrything and that they |are "gurus". These are people with 20 000 "utility" programs cluttering |their disks to compensate for what MS-DOS can't handle! For your information, I've been using Unix for much longer than PCs. I bought, setup, and ran some of my company's first VAXEN. I started with a PDP-11/70 running V7. That was before fsck, I think, so I did filesystem repairs the hard way. Then we got money for a 750 so I installed and ran a 4.2 BSD system. What a big improvement. I've only been using PCs for about 3 years. You're right, I do have a number of utilities on my PC to make it more Unix like when I'm in DOS. Things like "ls", "rm", "mv", etc. I still think Sun PC-NFS is a lousy excuse for a PC network. |It seems like certain PC users are incredibly bitter about Unix people, |which I could understand if it were DEC, or IBM they were bitter about. |But here this leads me to believe they have never used Unix. See above. |But I'll give unix the upper hand for most things anyway, because MS-DOS |is not an operating system; it is a glorified program loader, one step |better than a ROM bootstrap loader. In two years of heavy Sun use, and light I could disagree, but you are getting distracted. My point is this: Sun PC-NFS is NO NETWORK to Microsoft Windows. -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
pilger@uhunix2.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Eric Pilger) (03/16/91)
In article <1991Mar15.032416.14133@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: > >You want to check the printer queue, just telnet to the Sun. > What's all this talk about telnet? A simple batch file called lpq.bat with the contents rsh machine lpq gives me quick access to the queue for my most commonly used printer. This can of course be fleshed out for fancier features. In the same vein, I also have lprm, enscript, etc. In addition, there is internet mail access, remote backup, rdate, ... all the powerful Unix features I've grown to be crippled without. This then leads to the pointlessness of many of the previous arguments. PC-NFS is not a PC network. It is a tool for connecting PC's to a Unix network. I use it because I can't afford a Unix workstation of my own. PC-NFS, combined with X server software gives me the next best thing. If you only use PC's, then PC-NFS is pointless. I guess that's where PC networks come in. Eric Pilger NASA Infrared Telescope Facility 2680 Woodlawn Drive Honolulu, HI 96822
donp@na.excelan.com (don provan) (03/16/91)
The News Manager) Nntp-Posting-Host: na Reply-To: donp@novell.com (don provan) Organization: Novell, Inc., San Jose, California References: <1991Mar13.180625.14540@amd.com> <KJV.91Mar14122529@kapakala.tampella.fi> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1991 17:18:45 GMT In article <KJV.91Mar14122529@kapakala.tampella.fi> kjv@kapakala.tampella.fi (V{{r{nen Kari) writes: >In article <1991Mar13.180625.14540@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >> Now, the unix bigots will say "stupid user". That attitude is >> a big part of the problem. But I don't know if it is possible >> to make the unix bigots realize that.... > >Are you suggesting that Novell is *so* easy that even the most >ignorant users can set up the whole network and manage it properly? While i won't claim that *anyone* could set up an large NetWare network, i will claim that that's a good goal. Phil's point, i think, is that "unix bigots" believe there are two kinds of people: those smart enough to set up networks and "ignorant users". In contrast, in the NetWare world, everyone's an "ignorant user", it's just that some of them have read the manuals and have to answer everyone else's questions. :-) That makes ease of use the overriding consideration for NetWare while it's not that important for UNIX. >If that's true, I've got to start thinking differently about PC-NFS >and other PC-networks. Good idea. Here's something to start with: my car mechanic has a NetWare network in his shop. don provan donp@novell.com
cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI) (03/17/91)
From article <1991Mar16.015158.20566@amd.com>, by phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai): > I'm not familiar with Maple, but I believe Mathematica does run on 386 PCs. It does (Mathematica). > MS Windows on a 386 is a pretty good multitasking system and does offer VM. Especially if you like UAE's. I'm not quite ready to call it pretty good. But it does work anyway. > > I still think Sun PC-NFS is a lousy excuse for a PC network. I think we have it here. PC-NFS is probably NOT a PC network. Its just a network. > > Sun PC-NFS is NO NETWORK to Microsoft Windows. > Except for file sharing, print sharing. I must admin, I hate leaving Windows just to run the 'net' program(s). I think its getting close to the point where we are wasting too buch bandwidth here. I close my comments here: Novell: fantastic - I've used it and seen it. Windows: knows about it and works well with it. PC-NFS: pretty darn good at what it does. Windows: doesn't really know about it, but it works anyway. (I won't call this NO NETWORK, better yet, SOME OTHER NETWORK, no extra disks required). |----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |Tom Hite | The views expressed by me | |Manager, Product development | are mine, not necessarily | |CADSI (Computer Aided Design Software Inc. | the views of CADSI. | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
rasmus@napc.uucp (Rasmus Lerdorf) (03/18/91)
In <1991Mar16.015158.20566@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >I could disagree, but you are getting distracted. My point is this: >Sun PC-NFS is NO NETWORK to Microsoft Windows. And Novell is NO NETWORK to my Unix boxex boxes running TCP/IP. What's the fuss? Novell and PC/NFS are geared towards different environments. Right now I am running both. I wish there was one package that did it all, but there isn't, so one must live with the deficiencies of both in order to gain the benefits of both. -- Rasmus Lerdorf calgary!ajfcal!napc!rasmus 1020-64 Ave NE, Calgary NovAtel Advanced Product Concept Development Alberta, Canada T2E 7V8
erick@sunee.waterloo.edu (Erick Engelke) (03/18/91)
someone wrote: >|On the other hand, what we do get would be ridiculous on a PC. Things like >|Maple 5, or MAthematica. Basically anything that needs a STABLE network with >|REAL multitasking and REAL virtual memory. Sorry, but MAPLE 5 runs very well on MS-DOS computers. In fact, it ran my programs about 6 times as fast as our Microvax 2000's and of course much faster than our 11/785s. BUT, more importantly, running multiple maple sessions makes the unix box slow down linearly. Not so with networked PCs. Erick -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Erick Engelke Watstar Computer Network Watstar Network Guy University of Waterloo Erick@Development.Watstar.UWaterloo.ca (519) 885-1211 Ext. 2965
evas@cs.eur.nl (Eelco van Asperen) (03/18/91)
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: ... >You want to check the printer queue, just telnet to the Sun. Sigh, how about: "rsh server lpq -Pprinter" in a batch file LPSTAT.BAT ? Hmmm, a sysop might even create one for the average user. (BTW, I think you've made your point by now.) -- Eelco van Asperen. || Erasmus University Rotterdam uucp: evas@cs.eur.nl || Department of Computer Science, room H5-1 no claims - no disclaimers || PObox 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands
cids05@vaxa.strath.ac.uk (@Dr Stephen K Tagg@) (03/18/91)
I notiece from p.27 of Connexions the datacom newsletter march 20 edition that Sun updates PC-NFS for Windows 3.0 This is a new release PCNFS 3.5 plus support for SNMP and NDIS whatever they are Is there any chance that this might prevent further escalation of a discussion that I notice is being copied over three disparate newsgroups. Stephen Tagg
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/19/91)
In article <11981@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> pilger@uhunix2.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Eric Pilger) writes: |This then leads to |the pointlessness of many of the previous arguments. PC-NFS is not a |PC network. That is my point. Sun PC-NFS is not a real PC network. So we agree. Judging from the Sun Press Releases and magazine articles, Sun PC-NFS marketing doesn't seem to understand this. -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/19/91)
In article <1991Mar18.112947.9368@cs.eur.nl> evas@cs.eur.nl (Eelco van Asperen) writes: |phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: |>You want to check the printer queue, just telnet to the Sun. | |Sigh, how about: "rsh server lpq -Pprinter" in a batch file LPSTAT.BAT ? |Hmmm, a sysop might even create one for the average user. And how do you go about deleting a print job? With Novell and Microsoft Windows, I can point with my mouse and click. I know that real programmers don't mind typing (and I can type pretty good too) but most users don't see why they should have to do all that typing when mousing around will do the job. Then there's mounting file servers and directories, which Novell lets you do with point and click under MS Windows. -- The government is not your mother. The government doesn't love you.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/19/91)
In article <11981@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> pilger@uhunix2.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Eric Pilger) writes: |PC-NFS is not a |PC network. It is a tool for connecting PC's to a Unix network. I |use it because I can't afford a Unix workstation of my own. PC-NFS, I wonder how many Sun PC-NFS defenders are in the same situation. Using a PC because they can't afford a workstation? (is it true that PCs are still cheaper than Suns? What if you consider the cost of the software?) Well, I think such users are a very small market. As far as I'm concerned, when I use a PC, it's because I want a PC. When I want a Sun, I use a Sun. But I don't want to throw away most of the good features of my PC to make it look like the subset of Sun that is possible, or vice-versa. -- The Macintosh makes it easy to do sloppy work.
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/19/91)
In article <1991Mar18.012523.4241@napc.uucp> rasmus@napc.uucp (Rasmus Lerdorf) writes: |I wish there was one package |that did it all, but there isn't, so one must live with the deficiencies |of both in order to gain the benefits of both. Have you considered complaining to Sun. Or would you prefer to curse the darkness? :-) Join me in writing letters to PC Week and Network World. Or, you could run Portable Netware on your Unix box... -- The Macintosh makes it easy to do sloppy work.
cave@randvax.UUCP (Jonathan Cave) (03/20/91)
It works fine for me. We have a large model running on several machines, including SparCs (where the databases, relational DB software and SAS live), PCs (like mine and our clients), mainframes (across the country, via Internet) and MACs (which my staff insist on using). The user does computations, database queries and I/O, graphics, SAS jobs and so on without ever leaving the Excel world. Dialog boxes shape the query scripts and model output files, which are rcp'ed up to the SparC. The rsh command runs the SAS or Ingres or whatever job, UNIX editors fix the output, and it comes right back into a spreadsheet. No concurrent terminal sessions, no need for the user to know SAS or SQL, no nothing. And PC-NFS does this just fine. Of course, so would any other netware supporting TCP-IP and allowing drive access. In fact, we have a version running on a client's net that does not allow remote mounting, but does give rcp and rsh. And yes, we have "local" printing on network laser printers via LPT1:OS2 - just hit print in your app, and Bob's your uncle. I can read and send mail without logging on, Unix2DOS my files back to my local machine to avoid storage charges, etc. What else could I ask for? The only thing missing is for others on the net to run models stored on my machine, but I don't think I'd like that -- easier to use the Sun where we have decent configuartion control and far better file protection than PCs could ever provide. The only flies I have found in this ointment are: 1) Windows can't always see the network drivers, leading to occaisional (mode-dependent) hangs - but they are avoidable and I haven't had one for weeks. 2) the drivers themselves are big; I've only got 480K in DOS windows. 3) network stuff has to run in Exclusive mode; and 4) no interactive stuff is possible except through terminal sessions. None of these are more than minor inconveniences for what I am doing. BTW, none of this requires 3.5 either...
jmorriso@fs1.ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) (03/20/91)
In article <1991Mar18.193856.4735@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >That is my point. Sun PC-NFS is not a real PC network. So we agree. You still have it a little mixed up. NFS is a real network. PC networks are not NFS networks, therefore PC networks are not real networks. To say NFS is not a real "PC network" is a complement. Yes I am a Unix biggot. jpm
pasquale@sgl (Pasquale Leone) (03/20/91)
In article <29#=N#}@rpi.edu> barryf@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Barry B. Floyd) writes: >Debating what a "network" is supposed to be seems besides the point. By all >accounts Sun's PC-NFS seems to be deficienct in its compatibility with a >Win 3.0 PC environment. A product released as PC compatible and Win 3.0 >compatible "should" IMHO be recognized by that environment (i.e. Win 3.0 >network configuration should be NFS, NOT "No Network"). > >Beyond simple installation, I would expect a PC Win 3.0 network product be >able to mount virtual drives from within that environment (not exit to DOS >reset configuration files then reboot the system). Sun's PC_NFS is NOT the only NFS available for pc's. We use Beam&Whitesides BW-NFS on our pc's (7 of them) with Desqview and or Win3.0. Mounting virtual drives from within dos windows (Desq or Win) is not a problem. In fact you can mount or unmount a virtual drive or printer from within a dos window. Also their rlogin works from dos windows (Desq or Win), even several rlogins at the same time (one per window). I also must disagree with your attitude that existing software is bad because windows will not work with it properly. Desqview works far better with existing software packages than Windows3.0 does. Microsoft seems to want to monopolize the pc software business by changing the operating system with the intention of breaking other companies software. pasquale@sgl.ists.ca
bert@iiasa.ac.at (Bert WRIGHT ) (03/20/91)
I have used Novell, and for being limited to a PC Network it is great. Those who write my paycheck currently would find Novell's approach a little limiting. We are connecting PCs to a UNIX network, not the other way around. Using PC/NFS has been a great advantage for us. I use a PC on my desk, use PC software because I find it gives me more productivity. But I also need and use many of the programs found on our UNIX network. The comparison of the two is like Apples and Oranges, they are both fruits. I am also using Windows 3.0, it works. It took a little while longer then it should have to get it to work. I am looking forward to the new release. The real question I have is how to we, the users of PC/NFS get people like Aston-Tate, MicroSoft, etc to support our network also. Currently we have a need to run dBASE IV on the network. It is not supported, how do we convince them that support is needed? -- Bert E. Wright, Head, Computer Operations and Services International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Schloss Laxenburg, Schlossplatz 1, A - 2361 Laxenburg, Austria, Europe Phone: [43] (2236) 71521-212 / UUCP: uunet!mcvax!tuvie!iiasa!bert
jdeitch@jadpc.cts.com (Jim Deitch) (03/21/91)
In article <1991Mar14.194005.19662@ericsson.se> etxsral@california.ericsson.se (Lars Nilsson) writes: >Here is my opinion about PC-NFS versus Novell: > >PC-NFS,PC-TCP etc is not meant to be a full-blown PC-network. > >PC-NFS is a way to use PC's towards an Unix-network. > >PC-NFS and PC-TCP is configured in a more unix-like way this >makes it easier for the Unix-system managers to configure >the PC's > >If you want a PC -- PC network then buy a PC-lan as Novell. >If you want a PC -- UNIX network then buy PC-nfs or similar(I like PC-TCP). > >/Lars Nilsson > >-- >Lars Nilsson >Ericsson Telecom AB , Stockholm - Sweden >E-mail: etxsral@california.ericsson.se >Fidonet: Lars Nilsson @ 2:201/108.7 I am sorry if I am junmping in in the middle of this, but I have been reading the last 10-15 messages or so, and it seems to me that some of you like Novell, and some prefer NFS. I was at a product presentation the other day, and was suprised when Novell told me that they will support NFS in the new release, 3.11. Seems that they are recognizing the NFS people out there and want to make them be able to talk to a Novell server also. The technical guy I cornered didn't have a whole lot he could tell me, because he had just started with Nolvell 3 months ago, and had only briefly played with the nfs stuff. Supposedly the way it is going to work is that a Novell server will be able to mount a NFS structure and a NFS host can mount a Novell server. All of this will ride on top of the Novell tcp/ip that will be available in the 3.11. Maybe we can get the best of both worlds finally? As an aside, can anyone help me with getting PC-NFS to work with packet drivers. I have all the stuff I need (I think) I just need to know the load order for the modules and any hidden gottchas. My documentation got lost and so am I. Thanks, Jim P.S. Please respond by email to: jadpc!jdeitch@trout.nosc.mil -- ARPANET: jadpc!jdeitch@nosc.mil INTERNET: jdeitch@jadpc.cts.com UUCP: nosc!jadpc!jdeitch
rhoward@msd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard) (03/22/91)
cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI) writes: >From article <1991Mar12.231950.14828@amd.com>, by phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai): >> In article <rhoward.668798209@romeo> >> rhoward@msd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard) writes: >> >> And to see Sun go around bragging about their great networks >> really galls me. Woah!!! This quote in incorrectly attributed. I think Phil made the "galling" statement, but it looks like (at first glance) that I made it. NOT SO! I personally think that PC-NFS is pretty good; we use it and are happy... Robert -- | Robert L. Howard | Georgia Tech Research Institute | | rhoward@msd.gatech.edu | MATD Laboratory | | (404) 528-7165 | Atlanta, Georgia 30332 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | "Reality is showing us that perhaps we should do with nuclear | | power the same thing Keloggs is advocating for Corn Flakes - | | Discover it again for the first time." -- John De Armond |
phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (03/22/91)
In article <1033@iiasa.UUCP> bert%iiasa@relay.eu.net (Bert WRIGHT ) writes: |The real question I have is how to we, the users of PC/NFS get people |like Aston-Tate, MicroSoft, etc to support our network also. Currently |we have a need to run dBASE IV on the network. It is not supported, how |do we convince them that support is needed? Don't you think you'd get a lot more mileage out of Sun supporting Novell style API? -- Help! I just got a Macintosh. Anyone got a magnifying glass?
sob@tmc.edu (Stan Barber) (03/23/91)
In article <1991Mar21.183848.4783@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes: >Don't you think you'd get a lot more mileage out of Sun supporting >Novell style API? Didn't I just read that the new release of NETWARE (3.11) supports the NetWISE RPC interface? As I recall the NetWISE RPC interface is a superset of the Sun RPC interface. I know the two are related. Seems that the Novell API is becoming more like the Sun API. If that is true, why bother learning the OLD Novell API? -- Stan internet: sob@bcm.tmc.edu Director, Networking Olan uucp: {rutgers,mailrus}!bcm!sob and Systems Support Barber Opinions expressed are only mine. Baylor College of Medicine