The Hacker's Encyclopedia 1998/hackers_encyclopedia.iso/hacking/unix/unixmyth.txt

Text File | 2003-06-11 | 12.7 KB | 208 lines

THE MYTHS OF UNIX

IS UNIX REALLY THAT BAD?  IF NOT, THEN WHY IS IT SO SUCCESSFUL?

REPRINTED FROM THE FOURGEN UNIX JOURNAL

     FOR YEARS NOW, WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF CRITICISM OF UNIX.  WE'VE HEARD THAT
IT'S NON-STANDARD.  IT'S TOO SLOW.  IT'S TOO HARD TO USE.  THERE ARE NO
APPLICATIONS THAT RUN UNDER IT.  IT WILL BE REPLACED BY PICK, VM, CONCURRENT
DOS, OS/2, NETWORKS.  THE LIST GOES ON AND ON.
     MEANWHILE, EVERY MAJOR COMPUTER MANUFACTURER HAS BEEN RELEASING NEW
MACHINES THAT RUN UNDER UNIX.  SEVERAL COMPANIES HAVE CONVERTED THEIR ENTIRE
COMPUTER LINE OVER TO UNIX-BASED HARDWARE.  SOFTWARE COMPANIES THAT SELL UNIX
PRODUCTS ARE AMONG THE FASTEST GROWING IN THE SOFTWARE INDUSTRY.  MORE AND MORE
MAJOR SOFTWARE MAKERS ARE RELEASING UNIX VERSIONS OF THEIR POPULAR PRODUCTS.
ACCORDING TO HARDWARE MANUFACTURERS, 15% OR MORE OF ALL NEW 386 SYSTEMS ARE
BEING SOLD TO SUPPORT UNIX OR XENIX.
     IF THE CRITICS ARE CORRECT, THE MARKET MUST BE CRAZY.  THE DISPARITY
BETWEEN WHAT WE'VE HEARD ABOUT UNIX AND WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE MARKETPLACE
SHOULD MAKE US WONDER.  IF UNIX IS SO BAD, WHY IS IT SO SUCCESSFUL?  OR, TO
TAKE IT FROM ANOTHER ANGLE, WHY HAS UNIX BEEN SO MALIGNED DESPITE ITS
ACCEPTANCE IN THE MARKETPLACE?

WHY CRITICISM ABOUNDS

     FIRST, LET ME MAKE MY POSITION CLEAR.  MOST OF THE CRITICISM THAT'S HEARD
ABOUT UNIX IS SIMPLY INCORRECT.  IT IS IGNORANCE PASSING AS INFORMATION.  IN
THIS ARTICLE WE SHALL DISCUSS MANY OF THESE POPULAR MYTHS ABOUT UNIX, BUT FIRST
LET US CONSIDER WHY CRITICISM IS SO PLENTIFUL.
     I GROUP UNIX CRITICS INTO THREE DIFFERENCE CATEGORIES.
     FIRST, THERE ARE THE EXPERTS WHO ARE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH ANYTHING OUTSIDE
THEIR EXPERTISE.  WHEN THIS TYPE OF PERSON ENCOUNTERS A NEW ENVIRONMENT, THEIR
NATURAL TENDENCY IS TO LOOK FOR ITS FLAWS.  SINCE SO MANY OF TODAY'S "EXPERTS"
GREW UP IN THE SINGLE-USER MS-DOS WORLD, THEY HAVE LITTLE EXPERIENCE WITH THE
TYPE OF ENVIRONMENT REPRESENTED BY UNIX.  WHEN THEY ARE EXPOSED TO IT, THEY ARE
INTIMIDATED AND, THEREFORE, CRITICAL.
     NEXT, WE HAVE COMPETITORS.  THESE CRITICS ARE SELLING PRODUCTS THAT
COMPETE WITH UNIX AND THEY ARE GOING TO FOCUS THE DEBATE ON THE WEAKNESSES OF
THEIR COMPETITION.  SINCE UNIX DOESN'T HAVE AN ORGANIZED GROUP OF PROPONENTS,
ITS OPPONENTS HAVE CONTROLLED MUCH OF WHAT WE HEAR ABOUT THE OPERATING SYSTEM.
YOU CAN SAY ALMOST ANYTHING YOU WANT ABOUT UNIX AND NOT BE CHALLENGED TO
SUPPORT YOUR ACCUSATIONS.
     FINALLY, WE HAVE THE PURISTS.  THIS SPECIMEN IS AN IDEALIST FOR WHOM NO
PRODUCT IS FAST ENOUGH, EFFICIENT ENOUGH, SIMPLE ENOUGH, OR POWERFUL ENOUGH.
UNFORTUNATELY, MANY UNIX USERS THEMSELVES FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY.  IT IS
PERHAPS A COMPLIMENT THAT UNIX ATTRACTS THIS KIND OF PERSON, WHEN SO MANY UNIX
EXPERTS TALK MAINLY ABOUT ITS DEFECTS.  THE GENERAL PUBLIC CAN EASILY GET THE
WRONG IMPRESSION.
     WHAT KINDS OF THINGS ARE THESE VARIOUS GROUPS SAYING ABOUT UNIX AND WHAT
IS TRUE?

MYTH #1: THERE IS NO "STANDARD" VERSION OF UNIX.

     A STATEMENT CAN BE AT ONCE THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH AND VERY MISLEADING.  THIS
IS PERHAPS THE MOST WIDELY MISUNDERSTOOD ASPECT OF UNIX.  EVEN PEOPLE WORKING
ON UNIX SYSTEMS ARE UNDER THE GENERAL IMPRESSION THAT SOMEHOW THEIR SYSTEM IS
VERY DIFFERENT FROM OTHER PEOPLE'S UNIX SYSTEMS.  WHAT MOST PEOPLE DON'T
UNDERSTAND IS THAT FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, UNIX IS UNIX AND XENIX IS UNIX
AND A LOT OF OTHER THINGS ARE UNIX AS WELL.
     THESE VARIOUS VERSIONS OF THE OPERATING SYSTEM ARE MORE SIMILAR THAN THEY
ARE DIFFERENT.  THEY ARE, FOR EXAMPLE, MUCH MORE SIMILAR THAN 2.0 AND 3.0
MS-DOS.  THE DIFFERENCES MIGHT BE COMPARED MORE TO THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
PC-DOS AND MS-DOS.  SURE THERE ARE DIFFERENCES AT VARIOUS LEVELS, BUT WHO
CARES?  NON-BINARY SOFTWARE THAT RUNS ON ONE CAN RUN UNDER THE OTHER.
     THE PROBLEM WITH DEFINING A "STANDARD" UNIX IS MORE AN EMBARRASSMENT OF
RICHES THAN ANYTHING ELSE.  SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE MADE SO MANY ENHANCEMENTS TO
THEIR UNIX THAT THEY SERVE TO EXPAND THE DEFINITION OF UNIX RATHER THAN REFINE
IT.  UNIX ALSO RUNS ON A VARIETY OF PROCESSORS AND, AS IS ALWAYS THE CASE WHEN
YOU PORT OVER VARIOUS PROCESSORS, PROGRAMS HAVE TO BE RECOMPILED TO RUN, BUT
THIS ISN'T THE FAULT OF UNIX, IT'S THE NATURE OF REALITY.  WE'VE MADE HUNDREDS
OF UNIX PORTS AND, COMPARED TO PORTS BETWEEN OTHER OPERATING SYSTEMS, IT'S A
SNAP.

MYTH #2: UNIX IS SLOW.

     THE QUESTION HERE IS NOT REALLY IS UNIX TOO SLOW.  EVERYTHING IS TOO SLOW.
THE QUESTION IS HOW DOES IT COMPARE WITH OTHER OPERATING SYSTEMS.  NO ONE
CLAIMS THAT MS-DOS IS TOO SLOW, BUT UNIX (IN THE GUISE OF SCO XENIX) RUNS MANY
TIMES FASTER ON THE SAME BOX THAN DOES MS-DOS.  IN PERFORMING ANY "OPERATING
SYSTEM" INTENSIVE TASK SUCH AS DISK ACCESS OR SERIAL OUTPUT, MS-DOS RANGES FROM
TWO TO TEN TIMES SLOWER IN BENCHMARKS AGAINST XENIX.  THE MORE DISK ACCESS THE
WORSE MS-DOS PERFORMS BY COMPARISON SIMPLY BECAUSE, UNLIKE CALCULATIONS, DISK
ACCESS IS CONTROLLED PRIMARILY BY THE OPERATING SYSTEM.
     WHEN WE COMPARE UNIX TO OS/2 FOR SUPPORT OF MULTIPLE SIMULTANEOUS
PROCESSES, RECENT TESTS HAVE SHOWN THAT, ON THE SAME HARDWARE, OS/2 STARTS OUT
ABOUT THE SAME SPEED, BUT THEN DEGRADES AS MORE PROCESSES ARE ADDED ABOUT TEN
TIMES FASTER THAN THE UNIX MACHINE.  OS/2 USING THE SAME BASIC DISK
ORGANIZATION AS MS-DOS HAS THE SAME PROBLEMS WITH SLOW DISK ACCESS.  ARE THERE
FASTER OPERATING SYSTEMS?  FOR DOING CERTAIN THINGS, CERTAINLY.  THIS IS
ESPECIALLY TRUE OF OPERATING SYSTEMS THAT HAVE BEEN OPTIMIZED (AS YOU WOULD
EXPECT MS-DOS TO BE) FOR ONE SPECIFIC TYPE OF HARDWARE.  ARE THERE ANY
OPERATING SYSTEMS THAT RUN ON AS WIDE A VARIETY OF HARDWARE THAT ARE FASTER?
NO.

MYTH #3: UNIX IS TOO HARD TO USE.

     ONCE MORE, EVERYTHING IS TOO HARD TO USE, BUT IF WE COMPARE UNIX WITH
MS-DOS, WE DISCOVER THAT, FOR DOING SIMILAR TASKS -- CREATING DIRECTORIES,
COPYING AND MOVING FILES, AND OTHER COMMON HOUSEKEEPING TASKS -- UNIX COMMANDS
ARE NO MORE DIFFICULT THAN THEIR MS-DOS COUNTERPARTS.  BOTH SYSTEMS REQUIRE
THAT YOU MEMORIZE THE COMMANDS AND THEIR SYNTAX.  THIS IS A PRETTY COMPLICATED
FORM OF OPERATING SYSTEM CONTROL, BUT, IF YOU WANT SOMETHING EASIER, YOU CAN BY
AN EASY-TO-USE "SHELL" FOR EITHER SYSTEM THAT PROMPTS YOU THROUGH ALL THE
COMMANDS.
     THE PROBLEM WITH UNIX IS NOT THAT IT IS HARDER THAN MS-DOS, BUT THAT IT IS
SO MUCH MORE POWERFUL.  WHERE MS-DOS HAS A COUPLE OF DOZEN DIFFERENT THINGS YOU
CAN DO AT THE OPERATING SYSTEM LEVEL, UNIX PROVIDES HUNDREDS.  THE DEPTH AND
POWER OF UNIX IS VERY INTIMIDATING, BUT YOU MUST REMEMBER THAT YOU AREN'T
REQUIRED TO KNOW IT ALL TO USE THE SYSTEM.  YOU USE WHAT YOU KNOW AND EXPAND ON
YOUR KNOWLEDGE ON AN ON-GOING BASIS.  NO ONE EVER FINISHES LEARNING UNIX.  UNIX
UTILITIES SUCH AS THE VISUAL EDITOR "VI" ARE SO POWERFUL THAT YOU CAN STILL BE
LEARNING NEW FEATURES AFTER YOU HAVE BEEN USING THE PRODUCT FOR YEARS.
     THE OPERATING SYSTEM DEPTH AND POWER IS ONE OF THE REASONS UNIX IS SO
POPULAR.  ALL OF THE HUNDREDS, PERHAPS THOUSANDS, OF FUNCTIONS YOU FIND ONLY ON
A UNIX SYSTEM ARE ALL OF THE THINGS THAT USERS OF A SOPHISTICATED COMPUTER WANT
TO USE AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER.  THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT ON UNIX, THESE FUNCTIONS
ARE ALREADY AVAILABLE.  YOU DON'T HAVE TO FIND, BUY OR WRITE THEM.  YOU JUST
HAVE TO LEARN THEM.

MYTH #4: THERE ARE NO APPLICATIONS FOR UNIX.

     THIS IS PERHAPS THE STRANGEST CLAIM OF ALL, SINCE THE REASON THAT MOST
COMPUTER MANUFACTURERS BUILD UNIX MACHINES IS BECAUSE THERE *ARE* SO MANY
APPLICATIONS AVAILABLE.  AS THE FIRST OPERATING SYSTEM THAT SPANS ALL TYPES OF
HARDWARE, FROM MICRO-COMPUTERS TO SUPER COMPUTERS, THE APPLICATION BASE FOR
UNIX IS UNRIVALED IN THE COMPUTER WORLD EXCEPT FOR THOSE APPLICATIONS WRITTEN
FOR MS-DOS.
     THERE ARE CERTAINLY MORE APPLICATIONS WRITTEN FOR MS-DOS THAN THERE ARE
APPLICATIONS WRITTEN FOR UNIX.  BUT FOR MULTI-USER, MULTI-TASKING SYSTEMS UNIX
IS UNRIVALED.  THERE IS A PROBLEM, HOWEVER, WITH APPLICATION AVAILABILITY.  IN
THE UNIX WORLD, MOST APPLICATIONS ARE NOT PACKAGED FOR RETAIL SALE.  ALMOST ALL
APPLICATIONS ARE SOLD DIRECTLY BY THE MANUFACTURER, INSTALLING IT AT USER
SITES, OR BY VARS.  SINCE THERE IS NO RETAIL MARKET FOR UNIX, THERE REALLY
HASN'T BEEN MUCH OF AN EFFORT TO COLLECT AND DISTRIBUTE UNIX APPLICATIONS IN AN
ORGANIZED FASHION.  PACKAGES ARE AVAILABLE, BUT THE MARKET FOR UNIX MUST BECOME
MORE ORGANIZED BEFORE THE HOW AND WHERE OF APPLICATION BUYING IS SIMPLIFIED.

MYTH #5: UNIX WILL BE REPLACED BY OS/2.

     WE'VE HEARD THIS OVER AND OVER:  THE NEXT "THING" IS GOING TO REPLACE
UNIX.  IT'S BEEN SAID ABOUT PICK, VM AND CONCURRENT DOS.  ALL OF THESE PRODUCTS
ARE JUST SURVIVING IN A MARKET IN WHICH UNIX IS COMING TO DOMINATE.  NOW IT'S
OS/2'S TURN.
     FIRST, UNIX, AS AN OPERATING SYSTEM STANDARD, CAN'T BE REPLACED BY ANY ONE
OPERATING SYSTEM.  THIS IS BECAUSE NO OPERATING SYSTEM IS AVAILABLE ON THE
RANGE OF MACHINES ON WHICH UNIX IS OFFERED.  ONLY PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING
EXCLUSIVELY AT THE INTEL MICRO-COMPUTER WORLD FORSEE SOME KIND OF DOMINANCE BY
OS/2.  [I DOUBT THAT YOU'LL SEE OS/2 ON THE CRAY 2 -- UNIX, UNDER THE NAME OF
UNICOS IS ALREADY OPERATING NICELY THERE. -ED.]
     EVEN IF YOU LOOK AT JUST MICRO-COMPUTERS, THE IDEA THAT OS/2 IS GOING TO
OUTMODE UNIX IS CLEARLY A FANTASY.  OS/2 IS A SINGLE USER OPERATING SYSTEM.
UNIX IS A MULTI-USER OPERATING SYSTEM.  AS LONG AS THERE IS A DEMAND FOR
MULTI-USER SYSTEMS -- AND THAT DEMAND IS DRAMATICALLY INCREASING AS NEW
PROCESSORS MAKE MULTI-USER SYSTEM MORE AFFORDABLE -- UNIX HAS A MARKET.
MICROSOFT, THE MAKERS OF OS/2, HAVE SAID OVER AND OVER THAT OS/2 WILL NEVER BE
A MULTI-USER OPERATING SYSTEM.  OS/2 MACHINES CAN BE LINKED INTO NETWORKS, BUT
DON'T SUPPORT MULTIPLE USERS ON A SINGLE PROCESSOR.

MYTH #6: UNIX WILL BE REPLACED BY NETWORKS.

UNIX DOESN'T COMPETE WITH NETWORKS, IT SUPPORTS THEM.  NETWORKS ARE GOING TO
BECOME MORE POPULAR.  UNIX-BASED NETWORKS ARE GOING TO BECOME EVEN MORE POPULAR
BECAUSE THEY SUPPORT ALL TYPES OF VERY DIFFERENT SYSTEMS.  NOTHING OFFERS THE
RANGE OF COMMUNICATION AND NETWORKING FEATURES THAT UNIX DOES, AND BECAUSE OF
THAT, WE EXPECT TO SEE THE NETWORK MARKET BECOME MORE AND MORE DOMINATED BY
UNIX-BASED SYSTEMS.
     DOES THIS MEAN THE MAIN USE OF UNIX IN THE MICRO-COMPUTER WORLD WILL BE AS
A FILE SERVER?  CERTAINLY NOT.  BECAUSE OF ECONOMIC FACTORS, THE MARKET FOR
UNIX MULTI-USER SYSTEMS WHERE USERS WORK AT INEXPENSIVE DUMB TERMINALS WILL
CONTINUE TO GROW FASTER THAN THE GENERAL MARKET.  FOR SUPPORTING MULTIPLE USERS
IN A WORK ENVIRONMENT, NETWORKS ARE TWO TO THREE TIMES MORE EXPENSIVE THAN A
UNIX-BASED SYSTEM.  PERHAPS THE COST FACTOR IS UNIMPORTANT TO A CERTAIN
PERCENTAGE OF COMPUTER PURCHASERS, BUT THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF
POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS WHO CAN'T AFFORD A MULTI-USER SYSTEM AT THAT PRICE.  THESE
CUSTOMERS HAVE BOUGHT AND WILL CONTINUE TO BY UNIX-BASED SYSTEMS.

WHY UNIX?

     WHY DOES UNIX CONTINUE TO PROSPER?  IT IS THE ONLY STANDARD FOR MULTI-USER
SYSTEMS.  FOR APPLICATIONS DEVELOPERS WHO WANT TO DEVELOP MULTI-USER PROGRAMS,
IT IS THE ONE PLATFORM FOR WHICH THEY CAN DEVELOP SOFTWARE AND BE ASSURED THAT
THAT SOFTWARE WILL RUN ON A WIDE VARIETY OF MACHINES.  IT GIVES HARDWARE
DEVELOPERS AN EXISTING BASE OF APPLICATIONS FOR NEW MACHINES.  IT GIVES
SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS INDEPENDENCE FROM ANY ONE MACHINE OR MANUFACTURER.

RECOGNIZING THIS, BOTH HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS ARE TURNING TOWARD UNIX
AS THEIR FUTURE.
     COMPARED WITH MS-DOS AND OS/2, ITS SINGLE-USER COUSINS, UNIX IS FASTER AND
INFINITELY MORE POWERFUL.  AS THE POPULARITY OF UNIX-BASED NETWORKS GROWS, WE
EXPECT THAT MORE AND MORE DOS USERS WILL DISCOVER THE MANY BENEFITS OF USING
UNIX.  AS PEOPLE TURN MORE TOWARD MULTI-USER INSTALLATIONS, COST FACTORS WILL
ALSO CONTINUE TO INCREASE THE DISTRIBUTION OF UNIX-BASED SYSTEMS.
     FINALLY, AS HARDWARE TECHNOLOGY MOVE FORWARD, COMPUTER MANUFACTURERS HAVE
A SIMPLE CHOICE:  DO THEY DEVELOP A NEW OPERATING SYSTEM FOR EACH NEW HARDWARE
TECHNOLOGY OR DO THEY UTILIZE UNIX?  DEVELOPING A NEW OPERATING SYSTEM CAN COST
MILLIONS AND TAKE YEARS.  AFTER DEVELOPING ANY NEW OPERATING SYSTEM, THERE ARE
NO APPLICATIONS THAT RUN ON IT.  IN COMPARISON, UNIX IS READY NOW AND THE OEM
LICENSE COSTS A SMALL FRACTION OF WHAT IS WOULD COST TO DEVELOP A NEW OPERATING
SYSTEM.  AS A BONUS, WHEN YOU USE UNIX YOU INHERIT A LARGE BASE OF ALREADY
WRITTEN APPLICATIONS.  IF YOU WERE RUNNING A COMPUTER COMPANY, WHICH ROUTE
WOULD YOU CHOOSE?  YOU CAN TEST YOUR GUESS AGAINST THE MARKETPLACE.  MOTOROLA
JUST RELEASED A NEW PROCESSOR CHIP SET CALLED THE 88000.  HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT
TO BET THAT UNIX IS THE FIRST OPERATING SYSTEM OFFERED FOR FOR THE COMPUTER
USING THIS CHIP?  SINCE NEW HARDWARE IS INEVITABLE, UNIX IS INEVITABLE.
     DESPITE WHAT YOU MAY HAVE HEARD, UNIX IS THE FUTURE.