Unix Support or lack thereof (long)

[Mike Stefanik/78125]

Sorry, netpeople, but I just gotta let off some steam here ...

In article <5640 at rsiatl.Dixie.Com> jgd at Dixie.Com (John G. DeArmond) writes:
>I fully disagree with these statements.  By your definition, a C compiler
>product would be inpossible to support since there are infinite degrees
>of freedom of usage.  Rubbish.  From the tone, I gather that you've never
>supported a large DOS product and probably have not supported a large
>Unix product. [...]
>Though DOS support may look simple on the outside ("Why, it's only a program
>loader, after all" I've heard many unix people say.)  I can assure you that
>the combination of X different hardware combinations plus Y different 
>versions of DOS plus Z different TSRs and drivers  and networks makes Unix 
>support pale in comparison.   Try it sometime.

DOS *is* nothing but a program loader that has some perveted concept of a
file system, but we don't have to go into that now ... :-)

I have supported both DOS and UNIX, and there is no way in &#!@ that I would
even begin to think that DOS was more complex than UNIX!  The only thorn
in your side, DOS-wise, is the TSR ... and they are simple enough to deal
with: remove those *abominations* from AUTOEXEC.BAT and try it again.
UNIX is several orders of magnitude more complex than DOS (regardless of
what you heap on that aged dog).

>But not to belabor the point.  You want to talk about programming tools?
>Good.  Take a quick glance through "The C Users' Journal" or "Dr. Dobbs".
>Over and over are the words "Free Source", "Free Support", "800 number"
>and in some cases, "Free upgrades".   That's what it takes to be a player
>in the DOS world right now.  [...]

That is because the market is *flooded* with tons of cheap DOS trash, and
at one point, the only way for a company to stand out was to offer "free
support".  It ain't really free, but regardless, you get what you pay for.

> [...] I hope that becomes what it takes to play
>in the Unix world before long.  What it will take is for someone to 
>perceive a market for a quality Unix product and provide it.  We'll flock
>in droves.

We develop what I see as a *quality* UNIX product, and we charge for support,
and will continue to do so.  Again, you get what you pay for.  If you're
paying nothing for support, then you're probably not getting anything much
out of it.  Many of our customers are also DOS users; although they may moan
and groan, they have repeatedly told me that we provide the best support
of *any* computer product that they use, and they feel that they *are*
getting their money's worth.

>As to the claim that DOS products involve less development or documentation
>than Unix, I just gotta laugh.  I look at my Unix shelf and my DOS shelf
>and compare what documentation comes with ISC (minus the LPI and X stuff
>that I don't use) and compare it to, say, the docs with Turbo C professional,
>which I bought at the discount software place for $149.  Turbo C wins.
>If I set the Microsoft Word documentation beside the TC stuff (still less
>than $500 worth of product) there is no contest.

Because the documentation is thin on your shelf, don't generalize that to
include the entire UNIX world.  Personally, my shelf is groaning under the
weight of my manuals (ever see the full AIX 3.1 set?  The commands alone
take up 3 3.5 inch manuals).

And let's be fair here; the Pro Turbo C set just doesn't include manuals
on Turbo C as you imply ... there are also manuals on their assembler and
symbolic debugger lumped in there.

>The only way we'll ever get what we want is to demand it and to speak
>with out pocketbooks.  Speak out long and loud.  And recommend the
>product with the best support to your clients.  After all, we've heard
>all these arguments before way back when.  I can remember when it was
>fashionable to say that CP/M support was too expensive to give away.  I
>can remember outrageous prices for buggy software.  I can remember when
>documentation consisted of partial listings reproduced from DecWriter
>output. (Couldn't print the  WHOLE listing; after all, that's a trade
>secret) [...]

The UNIX manuals that *I* have seen as of late, and the application manuals
that we produce (and those of other companies) are hardly listings on a
DECWriter! 

>I just wonder how obscure Unix would remain if someone offered a $399 or
>$499 Unix complete, with documentation and no unbundling and tagged on 
>a non-toll free support number?  I just wonder if the Boreland Effect
>would reoccur.

A remark as stupid as this one doesn't even deserve a response, but I
have to say just this ...

OBSCURE!  OBSCURE!!  You are DARING to even THINK than UNIX is an *OBSCURE*
operating system?!?  Sheesh!  Dig your head out of the ground and smell the
fresh air, pal.  This is the 90's!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Stefanik, Systems Engineer (JOAT), Briareus Corporation
UUCP: ...!uunet!bria!mike