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? ---