[Info-vax] Anyone interested in another public access system

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <v9DhRs3z$Ghu at eisner.encompasserve.org>,
	koehler at eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
> In article <grdimo$dh0$00$1 at news.t-online.com>, Michael Kraemer <M.Kraemer at gsi.de> writes:
>> Bob Koehler schrieb:
>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>>    UNIX is still a two-mode system which forks new processes every time
>>>    it turns around, and has no concept of files beyond stream of bytes.
>> 
>> And ? So what. Essentially it *is* a sack of bytes.
>> Records grouped in blocks (as in MVS and VMS) are relics
>> from the era of slow tape and disk drives which had to be accessed
>> at a rather low level.
> 
>    What's wrong with having the right tool for the job?  

What's right with making everyone carry around a 40 lb. toolbox when
the only tool they really needed was a screwdriver?

>                                                          Sometimes a
>    stream of bytes is the right tool, sometimes it's not.  Generally
>    adding data structures and organization helps solve a problem.

But why make everyone put up with the additional overhead when one
person needs more than a stream of bytes?

> 
>    Which means having records and blocks, which are NOT in any way tied
>    to the low level storage, is a good option, and an enhancement of the
>    file system, not a relic.
> 
>    Only having one way to do things is a relic of the late 1960's.

Forcing people to buy and constraining them with all this overhead
which they have no need for is even more a relic of the 60's.

bill

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999 at cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>