keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson) (09/11/90)
I've used Merge with Intel's SysVR3.2 and vp/ix with ISC's 2.0.2.
I _much_ prefer vp/ix because of it's DOS 3.3 filesystem
compatibility. At the time I was using Merge it was stuck at
DOS 3.2 and I was told that 3.3 was "in the works."
Well, 3.3 ain't really what I need either (4.01, please) but it's
better than 3.2...
kEITHe
PS - I also use vp/ix because it came with ISC 2.0.0 and ISC does
_much_ faster disk i/o than does the Intel version of UNIX.dmason@digi.lonestar.org (David Mason) (09/13/90)
Thanks to all who have Emailed me and responded here. The consenus I am getting is that Merge is more "integrated" with the UNIX environment and is easier to set up and maintain, but that VP/ix is a better PC emulation and might have fewer compatibility problems. For that matter, I havent heard of any compatability problems with either - any comments on this? Somebody said that they both make the kernel bigger and take much RAM. That doesnt surprise me. It sounds like the difference between Merge and VP/ix may not be as important as the differences between the various UNIXes as a whole, and that DOS under UNIX is one factor in a bigger equation. Having said that, I think that SCO is heading the right direction with its "shrink-wrapped" style ODT. That kind of thing will get users and non-hackers to buy UNIX where they wouldnt have otherwise, which will give the UNIX market a big boost. BTW, Wain and I called off the flame war :-) (And there was much rejoicing... Yay!) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Mason Party on, dudes! DSC Communications M/S 121 1000 Coit Rd, Plano TX 75075 The opinions expressed herein are INET: dmason@digi.lonestar.org not necessarily mine or those of UUCP: ...!texsun!digi!dmason my employer. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) (09/14/90)
In article <968@digi.lonestar.org> dmason@digi.lonestar.org (David Mason) writes: > Thanks to all who have Emailed me and responded here. The consenus > I am getting is that Merge is more "integrated" with the UNIX environment > and is easier to set up and maintain, but that VP/ix is a better PC > emulation and might have fewer compatibility problems. I hope you didn't get that from anything I said! :-) In hoping to keep this simple..... I would say that Merge makes UNIX look and feel more like DOS, at the kernel level. I'm not sure what you meant by "integrated", but I would say that VP/ix has one hell of a lot more respect for the UNIX environment and philosophy. VP/ix has special hooks for allowing protected access to hardware through the normal UNIX devices. I've not had to study this much in quite some time, but last time I looked, it appeared that this facility would allow me to use normal UNIX security features to protect access to special devices, such as 3270 emulator cards. This was something Merge could not do at the time, and from my understanding of the design of Merge, it will never be able to do this. My hazy memory of other aspects of VP/ix and Merge design also gives preference to VP/ix, mostly because of the UNIX philosophy argument cited above. > It sounds like the difference > between Merge and VP/ix may not be as important as the differences between > the various UNIXes as a whole, and that DOS under UNIX is one factor > in a bigger equation. I would say that the difference between Merge and VP/ix, at the design level (as per my hazy memory), is as great as the difference between MS-DOS and UNIX! :-) In terms of the differences between various UNIXes, the only trouble I've ever encountered is with the half-baked attempts to merge BSD and ATT philosophy and features. As for general usability of VP/ix, I've had no problems, other than the normal config problems with terminals and such, which one ususally experiences with any application designed around the requirement for dozens of function keys. I have used MS-C to cross compile applications, all from one makefile, using the UNIX make to drive MS-C. With care in the configuration, any DOS or UNIX commands can be used at any time, regardless of the current environment. The only compatability problem I've had was with MS-C 5.01 and VP/ix 1.01.00 under ISC's 386/ix 1.0.6. But then the MS-C compiler has compatability problems anyway, since it appears they use some weird version of stdio, much different from the one in the supplied library. If you truely believe that there are things you cannot do with UNIX to do your day-to-day business, why are you trying to run UNIX? If you want to keep an existing investment of DOS hardware and software, why not get a nice integrated network (such as Starlan) to tie things together? You don't have to worry about the impact of DOS under/over UNIX, and your users each get individual workstations. -- Greg A. Woods woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP +1-416-443-1734 [h] +1-416-595-5425 [w] VE3-TCP Toronto, Ontario CANADA
src@scuzzy.mbx.sub.org (Heiko Blume) (09/15/90)
dmason@digi.lonestar.org (David Mason) writes: >Somebody said that they both make the kernel bigger and take >much RAM. That doesnt surprise me. you bet, when i run word 5.0 under vp/ix the process is about 2.6 MB, that is, it uses 637 pages {just had a look}. -- Heiko Blume c/o Diakite blume@scuzzy.in-berlin.de FAX (+49 30) 882 50 65 Kottbusser Damm 28 blume@scuzzy.mbx.sub.org VOICE (+49 30) 691 88 93 D-1000 Berlin 61 blume@netmbx.de TELEX 184174 intro d scuzzy Any ACU,e 19200 6919520 ogin:--ogin: nuucp ssword: nuucp
staff@cadlab.sublink.ORG (Alex Martelli) (09/16/90)
woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) writes: ... >If you truely believe that there are things you cannot do with UNIX to >do your day-to-day business, why are you trying to run UNIX? If you The answer, in my case, is: I want to keep my Fidonet connection. I have not found any software that will allow a Fidonet "point" to run under Unix, except a DOS emulator (...and not quite THAT, either... I'm having problems with sending outgoing stuff... but I'm working on that). I must share the modem and phone line - duplicating everything, including the computer, the modem and the line, would cost a BUNDLE. I need Unix for Usenet/UUCP (I *could* wing it under Dos, but it's a pain) as well as for every other sort of computing task. The DOS emulator also allows, as a convenience, to keep running DOS apps which remain around, although indeed in most cases it's just a convenience. -- Alex Martelli - CAD.LAB s.p.a., v. Stalingrado 45, Bologna, Italia Email: (work:) staff@cadlab.sublink.org, (home:) alex@am.sublink.org Phone: (work:) ++39 (51) 371099, (home:) ++39 (51) 250434; Fax: ++39 (51) 366964 (work only; any time of day or night).
dmason@digi.lonestar.org (David Mason) (09/18/90)
In article <1990Sep14.165510.5532@eci386.uucp> woods@eci386.UUCP (Greg A. Woods) writes: > >If you truely believe that there are things you cannot do with UNIX to >do your day-to-day business, why are you trying to run UNIX? If you >want to keep an existing investment of DOS hardware and software, why >not get a nice integrated network (such as Starlan) to tie things >together? You don't have to worry about the impact of DOS under/over >UNIX, and your users each get individual workstations. >-- > Greg A. Woods Thanks for the info. As to the above, if I thought DOS could do things UNIX couldnt, you are right - it wouldnt be worth the money to buy UNIX. I may not have mentioned this, but I am interested in putting together a system for my own personal use. UNIX is probably extravagant for this, but I like it better. At some point, I might want to do some moonlighting in UNIX, but the odds of me ever doing much DOS development are pretty slim. However, I know I will need to run DOS applications, which leaves three options: You can run DOS under UNIX, maintain a separate partition for DOS and switch when necessary, or find an old clunker PC and not worry about running them on the same machine. I prefer the first option, mostly because its got more "gee whiz aint that neat" kind of appeal. Sharing files and hardware to both systems would be really useful. Compatability is very important. I understand VGA graphics can be a problem. Cost is a very key factor here, also. If VP/ix meets these criteria and is more UNIX-like than Merge, that would be a point in its favor to me. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Mason Party on, dudes! DSC Communications M/S 121 1000 Coit Rd, Plano TX 75075 The opinions expressed herein are INET: dmason@digi.lonestar.org not necessarily mine or those of UUCP: ...!texsun!digi!dmason my employer. -----------------------------------------------------------------------