n931a@pnet16.cts.com (Et1 Ryan) (06/06/91)
Hello,
Having purchased COHERENT only about a week ago, and experienced
several "make" crashes (regarding their own shareware programs), I fail to see
the attraction of this program, (or at this moment, any UNIX program).
Perhaps this conversation could share a little insight on why they are fond of
Coherent, (Joachim???), and what they use it for.
I ask this out of desperation as I am still within my 60 day return
privledge window, and just can't see the advantages of this program over a
MSDOS multitasking system. Perhaps some advice on the easiest way to learn
and how to begin would help.
Thanking you in advance.
UUCP: humu!nctams1!pnet16!n931a
ARPA: humu!nctams1!pnet16!n931a@nosc.mil
INET: n931a@pnet16.cts.comjoachim@jrix.radig.de (Joachim Riedel) (06/08/91)
Hi, you mentioned my name so I have to (and like to) reply. n931a@pnet16.cts.com (Et1 Ryan) writes: > Having purchased COHERENT only about a week ago, and experienced >several "make" crashes (regarding their own shareware programs), I fail to see >the attraction of this program, (or at this moment, any UNIX program). >Perhaps this conversation could share a little insight on why they are fond of >Coherent, (Joachim???), and what they use it for. I once got a old copy of Coherent 2.3.43 as a gift. But only tried it a little bit and still thought that the support of it "died". So I never send the registration card to MWC. I always was interested in UNIX so I tried to learn more about it. It is more interesting than DOS and I decided to buy Interactive 386/ix, Now I have my own system ( jrix ) with 386/ix (my initials JR and /ix put together) and I liked News and Mailing in the UNIX-World. You met a lot of nice guys from all over the world. It cost me a lot of money but it was great fun. Once a friend told me that he has ordered Coherent 3.0.0. I first thought: "What's that ?". But then I was a bit interested, looked at it and the price and send a fax to MWC. They offered me an update from 2.3.43 (once cost $1000) to 3.1.0 for $70 and I decided to buy it, also the Device driver kit. I liked it and installed it on my laptop, 16 MB for DOS, 32 MB for Coherent. (now I have 70 MB and only Coherent) In the mean time I got a MAIL from a guy in northern Germany who send me three diskettes with SOftware for Coherent. So I was more and more interested in this small UNIX. You asked me for what purpose I use it for: Just for fun. It was a bad disease: the computing feaver. Once infected you always be ill. I use it now for News and mail (joachim@jrmini.radig.de, JRMINI = the ultimate Coherent System), porting programs, waste the time of friends for ftp'ing software for me to piggy (ZOO, WMAIL, TASS32,WNEWS3.0, ORIGAMI), and boring this group with a lot of article junk. But I never had problems like you. I found several bugs in Coherent, but never worried about. And I will work with Coherent as long I can afford it. If you don't like Coherent you should send it back. Maybe you will like WINDOWS 3.0 or a the new DOS 5.0 with the task switcher of the shell. Joachim +---------------------------------------+-------+-------------------+-------+ | Joachim Riedel | @ @ | Don't worry, | @ @ | | Geschwister-Scholl-Strasse 48 | \_/ | keep smiling | \_/ | | D-6050 Offenbach am Main +-------+-------------------+-------+ | Tel. +49 69 85 62 25 | joachim@jrix.radig.de | +---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
bill@unixland.natick.ma.us (Bill Heiser) (06/10/91)
In article <1991Jun6.041604.7361@ncep1.uucp> n931a@pnet16.cts.com (Et1 Ryan) writes: > Having purchased COHERENT only about a week ago, and experienced [text deleted] > I ask this out of desperation as I am still within my 60 day return >privledge window, and just can't see the advantages of this program over a >MSDOS multitasking system. Perhaps some advice on the easiest way to learn I keep seeing questions like this, both here and on various Fidonet conferences. The answer is very simple. DOS is a SINGLE-USER operating systeem. Regardless of what "multi-tasking" layers you add to DOS (such as DESQview, Windows, etc), DOS is STILL a SINGLE-USER OS. UNIX, on the other hand, is a MULTI-USER Operating System. If you want to have multiple users running various applications on a machine simultaneously, then UNIX is the way to go. There are cases where UNIX can help in a single-user environment -- but its multi-user capabilities are what make it stand out. -- bill@unixland.natick.ma.us ...!uunet!think!unixland!bill OR ..!uunet!world!unixland!bill heiser@world.std.com Public Access Unix 508-655-3848(2400) 508-651-8723(HST) 508-651-8733(PEP-V32)
chap@art-sy.detroit.mi.us (j chapman flack) (06/15/91)
In article <1991Jun9.175218.756@unixland.natick.ma.us> bill@unixland.natick.ma.us (Bill Heiser) writes: >In article <1991Jun6.041604.7361@ncep1.uucp> n931a@pnet16.cts.com (Et1 Ryan) writes: >> Having purchased COHERENT only about a week ago, and experienced >[text deleted] >> and just can't see the advantages of this program over a >>MSDOS multitasking system. Perhaps some advice on the easiest way to learn > >operating systeem. Regardless of what "multi-tasking" layers you add >to DOS (such as DESQview, Windows, etc), DOS is STILL a SINGLE-USER >OS. UNIX, on the other hand, is a MULTI-USER Operating System. If Two more cents' worth: DOS is an UNPROTECTED operating system. It does not enforce the separation of tasks' address spaces. This is why one faulty program can crash the system, your TSR's can mess up your other programs, etc. Most people just live with this when single-tasking with DOS. If you add something like DESQview and start multitasking, things get more interesting. It is entirely possible for task A to make a bad memory reference that overwrites something in task B's address space, which doesn't cause a problem until you use a particular function in task B an hour later, at which point task C gets modified and visibly fails. These problems can take WEEKS to trace, and are pretty much non-issues in UNIX (or VMS, or your-OS-here). DESQview/386 provides several levels of hardware-supported protection; these are disabled by default, though, and are of limited use because they break a lot of commercial DOS software, much of which is written on the assumption that it can get away with anything. I'm not slamming DESQview--I found it to be the all-around dad-blast neatest thing that ever happened to DOS, but it's severely limited by the underlying nonoperating system. -- Chap Flack Their tanks will rust. Our songs will last. chap@art-sy.detroit.mi.us -MIKHS 0EODWPAKHS Nothing I say represents Appropriate Roles for Technology unless I say it does.