On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 9:03 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > I realize that these days you're all pretty much icons at AT&T Research, > and we all know that's the only useful part of it left. But if I had to > run these programs, I'd just run everything though a VM. A VM is not only > portable but you can take snapshots of it and run it anywhere the VM host > runs. What's really the point of this? I know that you folk wrote uwin and > it's been useful to me, but sometimes you have to move on and find better > pastures. > > There's no way that I couldn't go into some place, given proper access, > and sort this out with a VM, their choice of OSs. All of this dealing with > Win8, Win7, WinXP, win this win that, it's a losing game. > > Except that you're icons at AT&T, what's to gain from this?
For us the gain of UWIN is cost reduction through portability - write once, run anywhere(TM), and a multitude of other advantages like automation, scripting tasks and giving power users the ability to use their systems better. The disadvantage however is the rather rough, unfinished touch of UWIN compared to Cygwin. There are too many corners which are hard to ignore (such as the lack of newer SUS apis, lack of 64bit perl or the lack of Unicode support in the Windows console), significant stumbling blocks for beginners (Olga Kryzhonovska posted a list of issues lately) and rather alienating in general (such has the lack of a software library like Cygwin has or a graphical installer to install software from a network library. Sometimes I'm reminded of the UNIX environments in the late 80' where bsh and vt52 terminals were the dominating user interfaces). The sad summary is: While UWIN is an advanced Unix-like environment for Windows it is hardly attracting new users in its current incarnation. Its for power users only who know the stuff very very well. Irek _______________________________________________ uwin-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/uwin-users
