Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ginosko!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!apple!sun-barr!rutgers!netnews.upenn.edu!hathor.ee.upenn.edu!iyengar
From: iyengar@hathor.ee.upenn.edu (Anand)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Remote NeXT Users, etc.
Message-ID: <14926@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: 1 Oct 89 03:34:54 GMT
References: <245300020@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <1989Sep30.044619.18106@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU>
Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
Reply-To: iyengar@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Anand Iyengar)
Organization: The Lab Rats
Lines: 27

In article <1989Sep30.044619.18106@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> mdeale@cosmos.acs.calpoly.edu.UUCP (Myron Deale) writes:
>   Perhaps NeXT is going a proprietory route, but then if it works as
>well as something like NSF, so what.
>   ... as long as filesystems can be mounted.
	Yikes!  I sincerely hope it works a good deal better than NFS (sorry,
SUN-worshippers)!  I've had a number of problems (from file inconsistancy
across machines - NFS is a lot more than just stateless to not being able to
have a user directory on some machines, becuase of mounting headaches).  It
would also be nice to have other nicities (like good process migration).  Don't
want to sound like a sun-basher -- it's better than a lot that's out there (and
it is a "standard"), but it's far from ideal (or an ideal).  *

>   I read in EE Times recently that OSF might adopt MACH, as an expedient
	I guess they need a standard to deviate from (.5 * :-).  
>to AIX. Lots of folks in that OSF crowd -- and IBM seems to have popularity.
>Why, I can't imagine.
IBM's big because they're *big* (or vice versa -- enough said).  

							Anand Iyengar.  

* OS's are like ice-cream:  everyone seems to like a certain flavor.  
  Hold the flames;  I like mine cold.  
--
"Surely you're not happy:  you no longer play the game."
{arpa | bit}net: iyengar@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
uucp: !$ | uunet
--- Lbh guvax znlor vg'yy ybbx orggre ebg-guvegrrarg? ---