Re: OS/2 & Cyrix

["R Tennenbaum" rtenn@xxxxxxxx]

I'm late to this thread, having just returned from out of town, but
would just like to offer an enthusiastic endorsement of Unix apps.

Perhaps I should say, those ported to OS/2 which I've used,
including: NCFTP (FTP program), Yarn (a newsgroup reader), GTAR/GTAK
(the former is an archiving system, often used in conjunction with
the latter, a SCSI tape-backup system), and ATP (a BBS QWK-mail
packer reader) -- probably two or three others. I have not been
expected to pay one thin dime for the use of any of these commendable
programs, and none has ever failed me. In addition to
this, they are no-nonsense text-mode applications, which I suppose
fail the test of "being intuitive" -- which I think means that one
must read a faq or other documentation in order to set them up.

Using Unix ports means having to learn a little bit about how Unix
works -- primarily getting a sense of directory structures.
Generally you put the executable in a subdirectory of a directory
which all the UNIX apps share; when using ports, usually a runtime
executable is required to do the translating necessary for your
platform, but the same one has worked quite well for all the
applications I've used.

Using a Unix app is, in fact, very much like using Xywrite: one tends
to set it up (like eg, settings.dfl) and never really bother messing
around with it, but when some tweaking is required, the online docs
will remind you what you put where. They have the further virtue of
being written and periodically maintained by programmers who simply
have
used and perfected them for their own use, and -- imho -- put them in
the public domain because they work, and I suppose because they are a
little bewildered by the tendency of many computer users to feel that
something can only be worthwhile if it is expensive -- when, to judge
by the tenor of the docs, is contrary to their own experience.

The OS/2 ports of these apps work well with simple batch files: for
instance, I have a GTAK batch file which will allow me, once I've
inserted the tape containing the file or directory I need to restore,
to specify the date of the backup, the type (full or incremental),
and the name of the file or directory I want -- and it does it,
always, and quickly. I would be lying if I said I installed my whole
system of backups and restores overnight, but then again, I can't
forsee changing the way I've set things up for a very long time.

I admit I haven't used any Unix word processing applications --
Emacs, which I think is the biggie, is fabled for being powerful but
very hard to learn.

I hope this doesn't earn me censure (since my bladder was empty
before I started this message and as far as I know still is), but to
echo Wendell's observation about Unix and Cyrix and OS/2 users having
something in common, I've always thought that one reason I like
working with these pragmatic, robust, text-mode applications is
because Xywrite was the first thing I installed on my PC in 1984, and
I got used to being able to its stability, and how it allowed me to
control what it (and I) was doing.


On Tue, 05 Aug 1997 22:49:16 +0900, Peter Evans wrote:

>>  Why is it only what *you* have interest in? We're talking about
>>installing windoz apps vs. installing unix apps -- I'm sure you have no
>>interest in any of the unix apps either, so why did you bring it up?
>
>Well, um, because (1) I'm concerned about what I'm interested in, because
>after all that's what I'm interested in. But beyond that tautology,
>because (2) I'd like to read about the real world--about particular, named
>programs. (Which are the programs, or kinds of programs, that are easier
>to install/run on UNIX/Linux than Windoze? I'm very willing to believe
>that they exist.) And because (3) I'm primarily a XyWrite-using processor
>of words. I like XyWin but I'm not wedded to it. I'd like to find out
>about how to diminish the bugginess of XyWin, run worthwhile complements to
>XyWin, or obtain a superior replacement to XyWin.
>
>What's the name of the non-WordPerfect "suite" for Linux that I think you
>mentioned the other day? (Or of any other interesting word processor for
>Linux, or [not UNIX, I realize] BeOS?) If I know the name(s), I can go
>surfing for further info.