On Tue, 30 Apr 2002 16:51:44 +0530, VamsiSudha Mamidipaka <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >Can anyone provide me with a brief listing of differences between HP3000 >and HP-UX systems. >( Operating system features, utilities and Other features ) Wow, where do I begin? I am afraid this may be more than brief. We have both HPe3000 and HP9000 (HP-UX) systems and so I can speak from first hand experience. As you read this, please keep in mind that I am totally biased in favor of the HPe3000 MPE/iX as a vastly superior operating system. This is a conclusion reached as a result of substantial experience with both. The differences are not necessarily listed in any order of importance, although they are all significant. 1) File system - With MPE everything looks like a file, including peripherals. All files have a structure, including record sizes and a choice of many types of files and structures (ASCII, Binary, message files, circular files, flat files, database files, etc.). Files can have labels and be differentiated by file codes. Files can be locked to avoid multi- user integrity problems. The definition of a file is a function of the operating system (MPE) and not each individual application program. MPE has a transaction file manager which insures robustness and efficiency. MPE provides logical device numbers for peripherals such as printers, tape drives, etc. for easy reference. HP-UX has only simple character based files (like a PC) without structure that cannot be locked. Every application has to manage the nature of its files as the operating system provides little help. Devices are referenced crudely by file address and are clumsy to manage. (In my opinion the file system is the most important difference between MPE and UNIX.) 2) Spooler - MPE has a robust built-in spooler that is easy to manage. HP-UX has a crude spooler that comes with it, but most people shop for better ones as an extra cost option. 3) MPE is far and away a much more reliable operating system that rarely crashes or needs to be rebooted. We only boot ours when we are patching or updating the operating system. HP-UX should be re-booted at least once a month to prevent crashes. 4) MPE has a much more flexible security system than UNIX. Files, accounts and users all can be given capabilities and/or access restrictions to suit. UNIX has a crude security simply based on ownership, group membership or just being anybody. 5) MPE actually has the concept of application accounts to separate users and applications from each other. There is no account structure on HP-UX, this is a mind game that depends on perfect security setup and membership in a group (of members; not to be confused with a group of files on MPE). In MPE users can be defined with varying degrees of capabilities from weak to system manager and everything in between. In HP-UX there are only 2 user categories: root (the system manager) and everybody else, with no capabilities to distinguish the abilities of non-root users. 6) There are many programming languages available for MPE (COBOL, Fortran, C+, Transact, SPL, RPG, Basic, etc.). You can even have different flavors of COBOL or Fortran, for example, on the same computer. MPE is a superior development platform which is why it is often chosen for custom programming applications. Of course, to get the full benefit from the HP3000 you have to utilize the many proprietary features offered. To do otherwise is to question the choice of MPE in the first place. HP-UX is usually limited to one instance of a given language per computer. COBOL and C+ seem to be the popular choices on HP-UX, but there are others. We do not write programs for HP-UX (too difficult), but just run canned applications. I have written many lengthy scripts which is tedious. The tools are basically low level, some are quite powerful. 7) MPE comes bundled with an outstanding database called Turbo IMAGE. This is a fast, robust and easy to use database, but is not relational. MPE also has a relational database called ALLBASE, which is extra cost and not as popular. Many fine third party utilities are available for IMAGE, such as Adager which allows the restructuring of an existing database for various alterations without having to unload and reload the data within. HP-UX comes with no database at all. Oracle or Sybase or HP Eloquence can be purchased at extra cost. HP Eloquence is often mentioned as an IMAGE substitute for HP-UX. I do not know if it has Adager like capabilites or even supports B-trees. However, my suspicion is that to use it would be a leap back 25 years to the early days of IMAGE on the HP3000. IMAGE is built into MPE. On HP-UX databases are bolt-on products that the operating system is not aware of. 8) MPE has an easy to use and robust command language (JCL) with many commands for both operation of the system and for user applications. HP-UX has a crude, cryptic set of commands which are clumsy to use and requires much care to learn. Some commands are built-in to the shell. HP-UX comes with a choice of several shells. Most commands are little programs that have been added over 33 years from various sources. Commands usually have many tedious and cryptic options to choose from. Some of the commands are very powerful (even dangerous) and make for interesting computer science in university settings. 9) MPE is designed for both interactive users as well as jobs which run in the backround. It is much more efficient at distributing computer resources amongst interactive users than HP-UX. Jobs are real concepts that can be monitored and managed easily with command support. This is why a smaller HP3000 box can do the work that otherwise requires a larger HP9000 to do the same tasks. With HP-UX the concept of "jobs" is another mind game. If you launch a process that runs in the backround you only get to see if it is still running in your session while you are logged on. Once you log off it is just another process that is difficult to monitor. 10) MPE gives us the major benefit of compatibility from one release of the OS to the next, each release upgrading capability without trashing applications and jobs which have already been developed. Upgrading of applications can be independent from the OS and from each other! Thus, multiple applications can be run on a single computer! This concept is what makes MPE unique in today's operating system world of UNIX/Windows. It is the most valuable business reason to prefer MPE over HP-UX. HP-UX is a proprietary flavor of UNIX (as is SUN Solaris and IBM AIX) which does not value compatibility at all. Each major (sometimes minor) release of the operating system will usually reorganize system file structures making scripts and applications unuseable until the applications are simultaneously upgraded along with supporting tools such as databases. All programs have to be recompiled (at the minimum) with new compilers to work with a new release. Thus, it is poor planning to run more than one application per computer because too much down time is involved and the coordination of various products is a nightmare. Furthermore, a UNIX shop should also have an extra development system on hand to work out the upgrade process while a production system continues to function (twice the cost). 11) MPE requires and enforces the separation of code and data which has several benefits. It allows program code to be used by several users since it does not change. This also is a major reason why MPE is much more reliable. 12)MPE protects itself from damage, even from the system manager in many cases. Obviously, the system manager can wreck the system if he wants to but more effort is required. In HP-UX the root user is able to do anything to the system, even by accident, with no questions asked. 13) Transition to an upgraded HP3000 or replacement of the system disc is a relatively simple matter of reloading the system and data from tape. This is a nearly automatic process and has been taken for granted by HP3000 users ever since MPE was first developed. It seems only logical that a system should be able to boot itself from tape as well as disc, but this is a foreign concept to most UNIX and Windows users. This is probably a fundamental shock to many HP3000 users that have not ventured to the UNIX world. HP-UX does not work that way. HP-UX requires a fresh, plain vanilla load of the OS which then must be configured so that it can even find the tape to load data from. However, just loading a previously configured OS over the virgin OS from tape will likely cause a crash because of configuration differences of devices, etc.. HP has attempted to address this problem with a product called Ignite. A specially prepared and current Ignite tape MUST be on hand at the time of disaster. However, it requires much interaction and use by an expert to restore a system from tape. 14) MPE comes with robust backup and recovery tools that users can easily master. HP-UX comes with crude tools like fbackup, tar, etc. that the user must cobble together with some sort of script as the first task to do upon owning and managing a UNIX system. Feedback from these tools is tricky to determine success of a backup process. 15) MPE can dynamically disable bad memory allowing a system to be gracefully shutdown. HP-UX panics in such a situation and crashes. Two different approaches with the same hardware. ..... The above items are simply some of the highlights of differences that come to mind when comparing the two operating systems. I am sure others can embellish and expand on this list. Each item mentioned above can be expanded upon for more detail, but this is not the place to do it. Current HP3000 users being stampeded to migrate to HP-UX should think about these differences and proceed with much caution. Current HP3000 users that have developed custom applications have much more of a challenge ahead of them than those just turning to a pre-existing package on HP-UX. Before committing to a major migration, buy a small used HP9000 and really play with it. Take classes on HP-UX administration. Know what you are dealing with and then make whatever migration plans make sense to you with your eyes open. HP tends to gloss over the substantial differences between the systems and minimize the effects. HP's infamous "Myth" advertisement currently on the inside cover of The 3000 NewsWire should be taken with large boulders of salt. They try to portray real issues as myths, when in fact their arguments are actually more mythical than realistic. I hope this is helpful to you and others. Good luck. * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, * * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *