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*.