Evolution of unix into standard OS

[Richard Wood]

I'd like to bring up a discussion that is related to the now exhausted
OSF topic.  It deals with the reason that the OSF came into existence,
and alot of the conflicts that people are seeing between the "old
guard" and the new unix advocates.

As we are all probably aware, Unix has been discovered.  OSF has
brought IBM, DEC and many other players into the arena in a way that
proves that Unix is serious business.  Why now?  Many of these
companies are doing very well without Unix, and are not known for their
activity in the Unix space.  What's so new?

What's the motivation?

I think we are all aware that Unix is not really the ideal operating
system for many purposes.  I usually characterize it as "expert
friendly, novice hostile" when explaining it to new comers.  It's hard
to think of a commonly used operating system that provides fewer
features to aid the novice.   It will take a great deal of work before
Unix is capable of addressing some market needs as well as already
available proprietary operating systems.

The obvious difference is that Unix has become "the standard".  But
what does this mean?  Are we really to expect that non-technical
customers are going to suddenly adapt to the bizarre nature of Unix?

My point is that there are three markets for "unix" today.  The first
is the traditional USENET reader: the hacker/guru/wizard.  We choose
Unix because it's anarchistic, fun, or powerful.  We are already
comfortable with it, and just want more toys that don't get in our
way.  I suggest that most of us (not all!) prefer BSD, since it was
designed without the taint of commercialism, and shows it.

The second, and much larger market are the technical commercial
customers.  These are businesses that frequently choose Unix because
their employees demand it.  Or their market demands it.  But it is
still Unix that they want.  They are usually asking for a standard,
since they need to be secure about what they're buying.  But they want
"standard Unix."  I suggest this is where the demand for System V came
from, largely.

The newest market is still tiny in comparison with what it is going to
become, even though it is already starting to dwarf the "standard Unix"
market.  I'm referring to the people that want a "standard operating
system" and don't really care what it looks like.  They have no
particular desire for Unix, and frequently don't know what they're
getting themselves into.  Most of the really huge deals coming down the
pike are requesting this.

	Hacker's OS:	Earth's Moon
	Standard Unix:	Earth
	Standard OS:	Sun, and going nova...

It's this final market that got IBM and DEC involved.  They realized
that AT&T was quietly locking in the huge crowd by default, since there
was no opposition.  Recognizing that they couldn't stop the tide of
customers rushing towards standards, they took the initiative.  Two
points come out of this: first, if the OSF members _really_ want some
of those big bids, they'd better make OSFix real. Otherwise AT&T still
wins by default.  That means they aren't doing this just to confuse the
market, but to win the market.

Second point: it shows the magnitude of the deal AT&T was trying to
swing, and exposes the stakes.  AT&T was trying to maneuver Unix into
that big-win position, and keep it under direct control at the same
time.  The advent of OSF means AT&T over played their hand, or played
it too soon.

So what happens to "Unix"?

I can't imagine that the system that the wizards and gurus are so
content with will remain unaltered under the imposing demands of the
largest single market the industry has ever produced.  Those forces
will soon have "Unix" moving towards a more stable, controlled
environment.  I can't see how it's going to get there without losing
alot of what "we" want from it.

Perhaps it's time to split the market in two.  Let the OSFix people go
off into the real world with the AT&T folks and fight it out there.
Whatever emerges triumphant will probably be the dominant OS for the
next few decades.  But it won't be our Unix anymore.  (Perhaps we'll
converge around GNUix at about the same time).

At the same time, the really guru's OS should fork off and center around
what the technical desires are.  Keep it novice-hostile on purpose, to
differentiate it from OSFix/SysVr5+.  Otherwise we'll always be
groaning about how the big fellows are screwing up our system: we
should realize that they don't really want _Unix_ and we don't really
want what they're making.

Is there any way this can be done "officially", so the two portions of
the family tree don't diverge to far?  We'll lose our income-producing
ability if our Unix skills no longer match what the world wants.

I hope this doesn't seem _too_ biased from a DEC perspective.  I can
guarantee it has little to do with my official functions, and nothing
to do with what Digital tells me about.  It's solely the result of my
concern that Unix's success will destroy what I came to appreciate it
for.
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       It should go without saying that I'm not
                                 speaking as an official representative of DEC.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Wood ! Software Services, San Francisco ! Digital Equipment Corporation
===============================================================================