From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lm@mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2017 17:36:28 -0700 Subject: Favorite UNIX In-Reply-To: <201710012121.v91LLKHK004998@darkstar.fourwinds.com> References: <20171001175106.5FE3318C0A6@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <201710012121.v91LLKHK004998@darkstar.fourwinds.com> Message-ID: <20171002003628.GS16755@mcvoy.com> On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 02:21:20PM -0700, Jon Steinhart wrote: > Steve Mynott writes: > > On 1 October 2017 at 18:51, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > > > Why was Solaris so much worse than SunOS? > > > > Probably because it was so much more buggy on release and people were > > more used to BSD and didn't like change and the fact that greedy Sun > > had removed the compiler. Solaris 2.3 had core dumps from base > > binaries everywhere where SunOS 4.1.3 seemed quite stable. > > I think that the root cause is AT&T USL. When UNIX went from research > to "product" different people worked on it. And those people seemed to > lack the artistry, vision, and craftsmanship of the original developers. > AT&T pushed their SVR4 crud hard onto the rest of the world. Meanwhile, > the folks at Berkeley produced code more in the original tradition > possibly because of Ken taking a sabbatical year to teach there. SunOS > was the result of the pipeline between Berkeley and Sun. > > Solaris was the result of Sun abandoning the Berkeley branch for the USL > branch. +1 couldn't have put it better. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm