Nuke Richmond

From: <(>
Date: Sat Jan 13 11:49:25 2001

In <001b01c07d87$00c7e090$07749a8d_at_ajp166>, on 01/13/01
   at 12:49 PM, "ajp166" <> said:

>Anywho, where W95 is actually weak in my mind is isolation between
>applications and the OS. The result is a misbehaving app or driver can
>kill the system. Security is poor as well. The serious offense and W98
>(ME edition is best here) is TASK management and
>scheduling. In all it's a low security and weak multitasking OS. So if
>it doesn't perform with 10 tasks open then one should not be surprized.

I liken an Operating system to a bowl of hot soup.

In Unix, OS/2, Linux, Solaris, etcetera, the applications are like toy
boats floating on the soup. If you want to remove/replace a task, it is
as easy as pie. Moving an application is usually as easy as CP'ing the
files to another machine and running them. Installing an application does
not change the flavor of the original distribution.

In Windows - ANY version, the applications are like different flavors of
bullion and spices. They dissolve in the operating system and become
virtually indistiguishable from the solute. If you make the mistake of
mixing two incompatible flavors, you can't get only one flavor out of the
soup. Short of running the entire thing through a reverse osmosis filter
which is going to remove even the Microsoft flavoring from the water
leaving ... a blank disk, the fixes are composed of picking bits of spice
out of the soup with your fingers - painful, tedious, and ultimately
futile. Windows users frequently end up eating gross-tasting soup because
of this.

>Based on the above comment I find this to be my opinion of multitasking
>perfomance of OSs I've used or seriously looked at for PC hardware.

> Poor Win3.11 little to no protection for the OS or tasks
> W9x Limited OS and task protection and some

> OS/2 V3 Close to NT maybe better on multitasking,
>security is ???

OS/2 is significantly better than NT in the multitasking department and
has no serious bugs I am aware of. OS/2 shippes (desktop versions) with
essentially no SPECIAL security like NT does. It does have 'hooks' for
this security and you can buy IBM or third-party software to latch into
them and provide strong security. Warp Server versions are good examples.

The latest version of OS/2 is version 4.5 - Warp 3 was superceeded in 1997
by Warp 4, and Warp 4 by the 'E-business' products since 1999/2000. You
see a lot of Warp 3 because it still serves the intended function - like
the United Press International news service. They have used Warp3 for
years all over the world to move thier business. UPI, Bundesbank, and
Banco Do Brasil are not trying to win a popularity contest with thier
integrated solutions but by the quality of thier service. Warp does the
trick and costs very little to nothing in maintainance. Why change a good

I don't know about UPI, but during Bundesbank and Banco Do Brasil
evaluation periods, Microsoft was consulted and spent a lot in resources
trying to make thier product (NT) work for these customers. The customers
found two things: NT wouldn't scale to a national level, and Microsoft was
not experienced enough in enterprise solutions. They bought from IBM
because thier product did scale and IBM had the means to do it right the
first time.

You could sell some businesses like Banks and Hospitals a computer that
looked like a giant, rotten, orange if it works as advertised. They will
just stick it in a closet anyway. In this sense, the criticality of thier
mission gives them a different set of priorities and makes them immune
from the bigot bandwagon - unassailable by anything but the results they
crave. They have no ego to bruise and none to foist on anyone else ie:
"Nanynanyboobo, ours works great and you pay $10,000.00 every year to have
some high school kid save you from yourselves". They just want a minimum
of headaches.

I love these kinds of customers. They hire me, tell me what they want to
do, but not HOW TO DO IT. Being who I am, I'd put Warp Clients on the
desktop as well as the Warp servers in the back office. Here again,
impartiality (or apathy) makes them practical. They put Windows on the
desktop as clients to thier Warp servers to lower training requirements.
Since these machines aren't being strained much, they serve thier purpose,
since the servers work fine, everybody is happy.

> WinNT4 I use it, best of the MS lot I've worked with.

Much better than any other MS os except maybe DOS for stability. It has
warts as does anything else, but it's biggest wart is the SOUP thing which
is death.

> Linux It's getting too loaded with MSisms

Linux is kinda messy and poorly documented. I like it, but that is just

> Unix clones {FreeBSD, OpenBSD} good multitasking,
>excellent security
> BEST ..............unknown

NetBSD is best I think. Then again, I don't spend my days trying to keep
brilliant kids from trashing my systems so someone may have a more
informed opinion.

>I'm Biased as I don't think any of them are at the OpenVMS level of
>reliability, performance or documentation. The latter, documentation
>both in it's completeness and conciseness alone seperates it from the PC
>OS listed though linux likely has by shear bulk come close.

I just got into VMS recently so don't really have an opinion - YET :-0



Jeffrey S. Worley
Complete Computer Services, Inc.
30 Greenwood Rd.
Asheville, NC 28803
Visit our website at HTTP://
Received on Sat Jan 13 2001 - 11:49:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:33:47 BST