Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mailrus!umix!umich!mibte!gamma!ulysses!thumper!faline!bellcore!tness7!tness1!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Why UNIX? Message-ID: <1940@sugar.UUCP> Date: 6 May 88 09:39:39 GMT References: <908@sandino.quintus.UUCP> <1902@sugar.UUCP> <494@sas.UUCP> Organization: Sugar Land UNIX - Houston, TX Lines: 18 In article <494@sas.UUCP>, bts@sas.UUCP (Brian T. Schellenberger) writes: > In article <1902@sugar.UUCP> peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: > | And because any UNIX shell... even the Version 6 shell (anyone remember?) > | blows the CLI, or even any of the shells I've seen, out of the water. > I would submit that WShell + conman + ARexx provides much *better* "shell" > features than the version 6 shell. When (yes, WHEN) I get WShell and AREXX and Conman I'll try the combo out. > All the other replacement shells are doomed to trail Unix since they strive > to imitate it (at least all the others I've seen). They don't strive very hard, that's all I'll say on that subject. -- -- Peter da Silva `-_-' ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter -- "Have you hugged your U wolf today?" ...!bellcore!tness1!sugar!peter -- Disclaimer: These aren't mere opinions, these are *values*.