Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1+some 2/3/84; site dual.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!vax135!houxz!houxm!ihnp4!dual!mats From: mats@dual.UUCP (Mats Wichmann) Newsgroups: net.arch,net.followup,net.micro Subject: Re: AT&T vs. the toolkit approach Message-ID: <615@dual.UUCP> Date: Wed, 27-Jun-84 02:32:44 EDT Article-I.D.: dual.615 Posted: Wed Jun 27 02:32:44 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 22-Jun-84 06:56:28 EDT References: <283@stcvax.UUCP> <861@tekchips.UUCP> <511@islenet.UUCP> <2175@mit-eddie.UUCP> Organization: Dual Systems, Berkeley, CA Lines: 32 [ Botch away, guys - the rest of us love it ] Unbundling means that software vendors have to write software that will run on a minimal configuration. This is not bad news, necessarily. One of the places where BSD UNIX has traditionally gotten performance improvements is in converting standard shell scripts, which depend on executing lots of programs, to C programs that do the work themselves. Rob Pike may be digging himself a grave so he can go turn over in it, but the market is not seriously going to demand that the UNIX modular concept be preserved over getting better performance. Remember, what *REALLY* sells a machine is solutions, not potential. Much worse is being close-mouthed over machine specs. The days of the lockin are on the wane (not to say they won't come back later, though). One of the reasons IBM made such a killing with the PC was their very intelligent realization that they could expect better performing software by letting the details out the the world, rather than trying to do everything themselves, as they always had done in the past. If they were to change this policy for their micro systems, they would only do it if they were *DAMN* sure that they could provide all the quality software needed all by their little selves, not becuase of AT&T's success/ failure. AT&T, on the other hand, is probably figuring that the wonderful UNIX System will provide a means for developing software without releasing hardware details. Seems to me if they let out the hardware details, someone would write a word processor (for example) that ran exceptionally well on a 3B, and thus provide more of a lock-in. Time will tell who is right. Mats Wichmann Dual Systems Corp. ...{ucbvax,amd70,ihnp4,cbosgd,decwrl,fortune}!dual!mats