ON PROPRIETARY ISSUES AND OPERATING SYSTEMS
	
	I am a Computer System Analyst and System Integrator in one of the most demandfull and high tech. 
areas of todays computation arenas, : the Electronic Graphics Prepress .
During my work I have to integrate the three main current platforms into one well functioning unit: PC, UNIX-
Workstations and Macs and then to direct graphical files into the system and out to Printer Proofers and 
Filmsetters while storing data on 9mm track tapes, Exabyte devices, monstrous Raid 5 fault tolerance 20-50 GB 
hard disks, opticals etc.  

	Although we are using Macintosh computers for Pagesetting and Retouching purposes, I definitely 
prefer using the PC and UNIX WorkStation for that purpose ( and in fact, PC WorkStation and UNIX Work 
Stations are slowly getting into it and in some spots are taking over the graphical Prepress completely ). 
	The reasons we are  still using  the Macintosh is not because it is the best platform for the task , but 
because it is the earliest and only device that posed itself cleverly as a platform of choice for graphical tasks and 
as such it remains.  

	In my dictionary, The term True Open System belongs without any doubt to the PC and its derivatives.  
DOS/Intel machines are the only ones capable of getting nonpropriatary cards and devices without any 
restrictions ( true, sometimes with some amount of setup difficulties ).  
	The term Client/Server  belonged to the UNIX WorkStation solely, and with the introduction of 
Microsoft NT Advance Server  ( and partially  OS/2/2.1 ) I  prefer to consider Intel/Risc base machines as such 
too. 

	For almost a year already, all of the most important application programs that used to be considered as the 
Macintosh-only  possession, have been ported to the PC - Intel base extensively and to UNIX base WorkStation 
as well ( Photoshop, Quark, illustrator, file maker, frame maker etc.).  

	In my point of view there is no reason to use Macintosh machines at all.  But that conclusion is not 
coming just because Macs machines are lacking  computation power, ( the upcoming Power PC is to correct 
this point easily )  My main concern is in the term  proprietary Platform .  

	Yes, the Mac is definitely a Proprietary Platform .  I wonder if all the Mac fans ever tried to inter-
connect Mac to PC and WorkStation in a very highly busy / mission-Critical environment.  Believe me it is a 
nightmare and from the reason mentioned above. ( communication can be setup considerably easy if you prefer to 
use the Appletalk protocol, but this one is too slow and clumsy to be considered as serious option in mission 
critical LAN environment ).

	The MAC designers evidently, barely considered the existence of other platform and the need to 
communicate in a heterogeneous environment with them ( this situation improved a bit lately ).  In my point of 
view the proprietary platforms are setting us, the users, back instead of marching us ahead.  Just imagine the 
situation where nonpropriatary systems are the only platforms that exist.  Where would we be today ??  The 
computer industry could be One or two Computer Generation ahead  ( while enough room for competition still 
exists to fuel the development flame ).

	Did you notice that those that invented the term Proprietary :- IBM  and Apple are the ones to join 
forces and develop the Power PC ??  What are their real intentions by doing that ? !!  Are they pulling us to 
another, more hidden / sophisticated proprietary path ??  I would be careful about them any how.

	
	
	
	In a round table interview after the initial introduction, admitted Apples Vice President that Apples 
main purpose behind the Power PC introduction, was to grab more money from us the users (to his point of 
view Apple profit margins are too narrow !!! funny Ha ??) . 

	Lately I tested Power Mac running 16 Bit programs ( no 32 Bit programs yet ). 	 The results are 
disappointing.  The speed (although twice as fast as Quadra machines on the average) seams to be like PC 386 / 
33 MHz.  		 Mac experts  clams that the code did not optimized for 32 Bit operating system.  True !!  
but so are the 16 Bit programs running on the Pentium and here it is runs twice the speed and more than the 486 - 
50/66 MHz.  
May be Intel Corp. Is right clams that the Pentium chip cost more than the Power PC because its worth more 
!!!.  More over : The worlds overall investment In PC software toping Tens Billions of dollars !! Apple Corp. 
wants us to give up most of that investment and to go and buy there product  (In order to expand its profit margin 
, remember ? ) that lakes of software support yet and later on go and invest another tens billions of dollars worth 
of software to be able running its proprietary systems.
At the other end  Intel Corp. ( together with Microsoft ) Are preserving our investment ( by implementing CISC 
portion aside of the RISC portion in the Pentium chip ).  True the CISC/Risc approach, complicating things 
pretty much ( more expensive too ) and down the road we have to find a solution for the CISC architecture to 
make it more and more Risc like, but not on our back,  this change should take time and considerations in our 
needs.  

	We as computer users have more power then you think we have.  By not supporting  the Proprietary 
approached companies, and at the same time supporting those companies that go in the main stream, we have the 
power to influence the computation directions to the users (our)   benefits.

	UNIX Machines are a different story but not so far away from the MAC as you might think.  More then 
20 different versions of  UNIX OS are still scattered all over. 

	Each one claims to be THE best and each is hardly compatible with the other ( remember the proprietary 
approach ? ).  the only glue that gathers them briefly together is the MS NT OS ( and specifically the Microsoft 
NT Advance Server )  fears and from a definite strong reason ( after investigating and evaluating in depth the MS 
NT Advance Server and its ability and stability to interconnect most of the OS existing on the market - IPX, 
TCP/IP, OS2, WIN, DOS, I can tell you folks,  This Operating System is amazing - it is a pleasure to install and 
configure, you definitely feel the futures winds blowing around you.  Try it out !! it is going to change your mind 
about every thing you believed prior to that !!) 

	UNIX as an operating system is pretty powerful although the human interface is terrible.  So with whom 
to go ??

	Are we to go with Sun Microsystems ?? A good platform !!  but  again Proprietary , you pay heavy 
royalties for the name only ( look under the hood of Sun Spark  station,  too simple to justify the around 10-15 
thousand dollars and up price tag ), in addition to great difficulties to interconnect PCs and Macs.  I would 
consider working with Sun station, just if a definite need arises and with a lot of doubts.

	Are we to go with IBM AIX ??  . Upfront  NO !!  Another proprietary system.  We have been in that story 
already starting at the beginning of the eighties,  what ?? do you suggest to go and be trapped again with the 
inventor of the Proprietary   term ??   NO Thanks !!

	



	And now to a real nice story !!  : Because I got use to the Sun-UNIX Operating System, I thought it would 
be a good idea  to get the new Solaris 2.3 for Intel base x86 machines and to install it onto one of my 486 based 
machines at my Toronto Lab.  To make a long story short :  This operating system is extremely picky.  I have 486 
machine, 32 MB Ram, 1742 Eisa Adaptec Scsi host adapter, 2.4 GB Seagate H.D. , SpeedStar 24 Video Card, 
Serial mouse, 17 mitsubishi DiamondScan Multisinc monitor, NEC 3x  CD-ROM device, Etc.  

	Sounds like a good configuration to start with, right ??...  so wrong !!  The problems I encountered to 
install the Solaris operating system shows up clearly how proprietary systems maker can not cope with 
nonpropriatary system like the PC.

	The Solaris could not recognize and operate with : the Scsi host adapter, the video card, the CD-ROM, the 
mouse, and finally the motherboard itself.  The motherboard issue was the last straw that brought me to dump for 
good this operating system and not to use it any more !! When Suns Tech Support advised me to replace the 
SpeedStar 24 video card with ATI Ultra Pro, I did.  They advised me to replace the Scsi 1742 with 1542 CF, I 
did. ( the installation process stacked on each of these items ). They advised me to change the CD-ROM device, I 
did  too. 
	
	But when they advised me to replace the mother board itself ( that one worked perfectly well with Win 
NT and NT advance Server, OS2/2.1, Novell Netware,  widows and Win for Workgroup, about 100 windows 
programs and very complicated OS2 applications ) I felt that I can not take it any more and dump for good the 
.........you know what !! ( and that after spending about $1500.- to bring the machine to SUN requirements !!  Was 
I patient enough ?  Yes I think I was,  and maybe more than needed.

	Another personal opinion : If  the UNIX OS after being around close to twenty years is so UN-user 
friendly,  and If  the Macintosh is so ignorant about helping us the users to coexist in a multi platform 
environment,  why should we the users  support them ? By supporting them we are contributing to more 
confusion and frustration, so lets vote by our wallets, that is the only force that can move our industry to our 
direction.  We are the ones that pay the proprietary  price.  The hardware/software vendors are very happy to keep 
up our confusion, they are making their living out of that,  so do not let them.

	So who left ??  I will tell you who left !!  Our old friend the PC !!  Luckily what was left from the old PC 
is the name only.  the PC is not a Personal Computer any more.  It is a WorkStation by  definition in any mean, 
that still preserves the ease of use, nonproprietary and  openness of the old system ( not to forget the price !! ). 

	Consider this :  coming to the PC  nearest you the choice of OS2/2.1 or better yet the MS NT Advance 
Server and station ( a definite answer and more to UNIX OS and Client/Server requirements ).  The Pentium 
gives you about 100 MIPS computation power and improving ( floating point performance is an issue to yet 
overcome ),  Plug and play issue is in the very near future (Chicago).  Sextium ( ?? ) with about 300 MIPS is not 
so far away.  Support for OLE 2.0 is pretty extensive.  Support for symmetrical processing exists already.  Object 
Oriented  is as far away as the end of this year ( partially implemented with OS2 OS ).   PCs  are running now 
Intel base and Risc base processors alike.  Thousands of applications ( our biggest investment in our computers ) 
are compatible and will be compatible in the future.







	The MS Advance Server Is very stable but take my advice : get the interim version # 2 ( 8 diskettes - 
Dated Feb. 1994 , can be downloaded free from Microsoft BBS ) and upgrade your system before going to a 
serious mission critical application ( the interim creates a few very minor new problems; you can ignore them ). 
 In a few months the Daytona, the main upgrade for MS NT is expected .  My advice:  do all the preparations 
training communication Etc. with NT 3.1 , consider using the Daytona for the real thing. 

		The drive to write this article came to me by reading the huge amount of articles in the magazines 
all over about the Apple launching of the Power PC.  I started to ask myself why all this celebrations 
happening.  Risc platforms are definitely not something new on the PC platforms ( MIPS, RS4000 Etc. ) ,  I can 
not recall such extravaganza when the other PC - Risc machines announced during the year 1993. 
Therefor I can count three main reason for the huge publicity the Power Mac got in the papers:
	
	A. Authors has not investing much serious thought, what is behind the Power PC introduction.
	B. The desire not to fall behind the magazines that already published articles.
	C.  Approach of  give / take between Apple Corp. and some magazines !!.

It is for  you the readers to choose the correct reason.  	In any case the slow initial sales of the  Power Mac 
shows up clearly that users all over are more cautious and clever than Apple Corp. management anticipated.
Apple claims : the Power PC chip  is cheaper 50 % than the Pentium chip! so how come I had to pay $ 4500.- 
for entry level ( 601 model ) Power PC ??  ( $ CDN ) and that included 4 MB Ram only and 14  SVGA 
monitor (for additional 8 MB Ram and 17  color monitor you should add  ~ $ 1500.- ).

	Comments / ideas Etc. are welcome to the address bellow
The reader is free to make any usage of this article provided it is kept complete. no usage of portion of  this article 
is allowed without written permission of Compuroll Canada.
Aaron Roll - Compuroll  Canada,
110 Promenade Circle, Suite 1410, Thornhill, Ontario, Canada, L4J-7W8 
Tel:  905-886-8998,  Fax: 905-886-8797.
     



4



