Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!um-math!sharkey!cfctech!teemc!hpftc!zardoz!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!apple!sun-barr!newstop!sun!sally!plocher From: plocher%sally@Sun.COM (John Plocher) Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386 Subject: Re: _UNIX_Today!_ hits a new benchmarking low Message-ID: <123997@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: 30 Aug 89 20:45:24 GMT References: <16054@vail.ICO.ISC.COM> Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM Reply-To: plocher@sun.UUCP (John Plocher) Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View Lines: 53 I too was astonished by what seemed to be a blatent ad for Bell Tech Unix (BTU) It seemed that the "reviewer" must have had old copies of ISC and Microport sitting around and used them for comparison with a brand new copy of Bell Tech. On one hand, if the goal of the review had been "PC Workstations" (as the title suggests), then he should have used BTU on ALL his hardware platforms. This would have given the reader a feeling about how hardware changes affect performance. On the other hand, looking at "Unix on PC Workstations", he should have installed and used the different versions of Unix on the same hardware. This would have given the reader a way to evaluate the products supplied by the different vendors. Of course, the reviewer should have gotten the latest versions of Unix from all the vendors - Microport 3.0e, ISC V/386 3.2, and Bell Tech Unix 3.2, as well as Everix ESIX/386 3.2C, SCO Unix 3.2, ATT 3.2, and Dell Computer's 3.2 version. On the third hand, if the thrust had been "Complete Workstation Packages" (Those coming complete with both Hardware and Unix Software), he should have compared some of the other 386 based "workstations" in this price range (many of the Apollo systems, the Sun 386i, Convergent, ATT WGS systems, and others). Instead of this, the reviewer used Sun3s (68020) and a couple of bigger Vaxen (VAX/785 & VAX/8600)! As Dick said, ISC 1.0.6 is a year old! Microport 2.2 is almost TWO years old! The different hardware platforms and the old versions combine to make a complete joke of the "review". As an overview of 3.2 Unix and the Bell Tech/Intel product line it is digestable, but to class this as a review goes a bit too far over the line. The real laugh came when reading the author's background: Bob Morein is a software author and is well-known for his versatile benchmark- ing tools. He is a frequent contribu- ter to computer publications. Morein can be reached at bob@utoday. Versatile Benchmarks? With a methodology like he used in this article? Yes, I see. His benchmarks can prove anything he wants them to! :-) -John Plocher In article <16054@vail.ICO.ISC.COM> rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn) writes: >Cautious disclaimer: I'm speaking as an individual, not for ISC. > >The August 21, 1989 issue of _UNIX_Today!_ has an article reviewing the >Intel (nee Bell Tech) MPE--a 386-based "workstation". The discussion >itself is OK, but the comparison to other machines is a mess.