Re: Operating Systems

[John Howard <jhoward@sky.net>]

[deletions]
On 28 Jul 1997, Skip Carter wrote:
> John Howard <jhoward@sky.net> writes:
> |> On Tue, 22 Jul 1997, Robert D. Yexley wrote:
> |> > Looking for some objective opinions.  I am a new programmer and am
> |> > going to be doing it for a living and will be buying a new computer
> |> > soon. I am trying to find out what will be the best and most
> |> > practical operating system to run on a home computer that will be
> |> > used for programming a lot.
> |>
> |> A comical paraphrase from the Unix Haters Handbook site: "Linux is
> |> free if your time is worthless." Otherwise opt for a commercialized
> |> operating system that has proven itself reliable and that will not
> |> suddenly
>                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> 	My experience with Linux is that it is EXTREMELY reliable.

I did not mean to imply that Linux is not reliable. But I tried to show 
that Linux cannot always do the job. It does not have the patented
technologies used by IBM, Apple, or Microsoft for home users. For example,
Linux does not have IBM VoiceType technology or anything comparable.

To me the focus of the original question is about a home computer user
wanting the option to develop software for as many multiple targets as 
possible from a stable host environment. (Also I don't even believe Linux 
is stable. There are too many variations of Linux to call it stable. Your 
Linux can very well be reliable. But how stable can Linux ever be when
each end user is free to modify the base operating system and introduce
incompatibility. Linux is "hackerware". That is not necessarily a bad
thing.)

> |> disappear to force you to upgrade your computer systems. (Some 
>                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 		It seems to me that MS OS's do this all the time

Precisely.

> Even if Linux disappeared, I wouldn't be at a loss since I have the
> source code to all of it and can maintain it myself if necessary.

Unix compatibility and "hackerware" are the greatest strengths of Linux. 
Most home users don't really care about Unix compatibility. If they did 
then Microsoft Windows 95 would be supporting Unix. The next greatest 
strength behind Linux is the popular belief that you are getting something 
useful for nothing. The real question of Linux is "how useful compared to 
other operating systems". If your business has the resources to maintain
the code or pay someone else to maintain it then Linux may be cost
effective compared to purchasing an operating system for each machine. But
the business use of a computer system is not always the same as home use.

A particular operating system is the best choice if and only if it is the 
best you can afford. Personally, I afforded to pay to use Warp for both my
business and home use. OS/2 is stable. Now IBM does the maintenance and 
the improvements to the operating system mostly to make it easier to use. 
That translates into time saved to me and to the other users of Warp. I am 
done advocating in comp.lang.ada about a Warp 4 host environment for 
programming with Ada. The issue is relevant but only to a small audience.
Though I may write about this subject whenever a new Warp is released. Use 
the best of whatever you can afford. Less than $300 gets you Warp 4 and 
substantial software development resources from IBM.

-- John Howard <jhoward@sky.net>               -- Team Ada  Team OS/2 --