Glynn Clements wrote
>
> CyberPeasant wrote:
>
> > > So, it's basically a toss-up between features or simplicity. Judging
> > > by the longevity of Unix, it would seem that simplicity wins.
> >
> > If longevity is the criterium, doesn't MVS or some other hoary IBM
> > mainframe OS win? COBOL, RPG, warts and all...
>
> They would if people still used them for all-new systems.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that the only
> reason that any of the above were still in use was for compatibility
> with existing setups.
>
> Unix (and Linux) is being installed in environments with no prior
> history of Unix usage. Is the same true of IBM mainframes, COBOL, RPG,
> etc?
Beats me. I don't work. Somehow I think that IBM was still in business,
last time I looked. And still selling systems for high-end DB use.
Ditto for Tandem and some others. (Fujitsu comes to mind, and Hitachi).
I will confess ignorance to the role of Unix in areas like this; but I
have been under the impression that it has always been a weak competitor
with more capable systems for large-scale data management.
Dave
--
--== Things that suck: mowing the lawn ==--
