Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!egvideo!edhew
From: edhew@egvideo.UUCP (Ed Hew)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: SCO Unix 3.2 <-?-> comp.unix.xenix
Summary: is SCO XENIX going to disappear?  Not likely!
Keywords: SCO, XENIX, UNIX, 3.2
Message-ID: <2040@egvideo.UUCP>
Date: 16 Jun 89 04:00:00 GMT
References: <184@usource.UUCP> <18698@cup.portal.com> <2022@egvideo.UUCP> <193@icdi10.UUCP>
Reply-To: edhew@egvideo.UUCP (Ed Hew)
Followup-To: comp.unix.xenix
Organization: A Box in the Basement, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 67

In article <193@icdi10.UUCP> fr@icdi10.UUCP (Fred Rump from home) writes:

>>In article <2022@egvideo.UUCP> edhew@egvideo.UUCP (Ed Hew) writes:
>>
>>It's likely that SCO Xenix will be around (286/386) for quite a while. 
>>On the other hand, SCO UNIX appears to be directed towards sites which
>>require AT&T based UNIX, full binary portability, C2 level audit security,
>>We have two very good products here, but they're directed towards different
>>markets ("authorized comments" are welcome).		--ed
>
>This does not check with the facts as I know them.
>My assumption is that the 286 Xenix version will stay but that on the 386 
>side it will simply go away and turn into SCO UNIX 386.
>
>Am I wrong? I don't think SCO will support two 386 Unixes. I wouldn't.
>
>Fred Rump

I have requested and received the "facts" from a qualified source at SCO.

The following is reprinted with the permission of the author:

} >From lsuc!attcan!uunet!sco!msiffin Thu Jun 15 09:27:35 1989
} Received: by xenicon.uucp (smail2.5)
} 	id AA01508; 15 Jun 89 09:27:35 EDT (Thu)
} Received: from sco.UUCP by uunet.uu.net (5.61/1.14) with UUCP 
} 	id AA26398; Thu, 15 Jun 89 02:15:24 -0400
} From: uunet!sco!msiffin
} Message-Id: <8906150615.AA26398@uunet.uu.net>
} To: lsuc!xenicon!edhew
} Subject: Xenix vs. UNIX
} Date: Wed Jun 14 08:00:46 1989
} Status: ORr
} 
} Ed,
} 
} Let me put and end to the debate as to SCO's position in regards
} to Xenix's future in conjunction with the upcoming SCO UNIX product.
} SCO has always been known as backward compatible as well as forward compatible.
} Therefore, our position with Xenix is that we will continue to sell and
} support 8086 Xenix, 286 Xenix and 386 Xenix. The last actual version of
} SCO Xenix will be 2.3.2 Xenix on both the 286 and 386 platforms respectively.
} 
} >From a company standpoint, as well as a marketing standpoint it makes sense
} to continue selling what made you a success to begin with and continues to
} make you a success.  Xenix is a strong word that is definitely associated
} with SCO, therefore why discontinue it's impact.  Anyway, the bottom line is
} that SCO is providing a UNIX product for many reasons, one of the main ones
} being that we can now offer (thanks to the cooperation of at&t and microsoft)
} a full fledged binary compatible UNIX product that many peoples desire. 
} 
} 
} Michael Siffin
} Account Manager
} SCO
} 

Hopefully the above will be sufficiently definitive material to allow
all interested to form their own opinions as to the future of both Xenix
and UNIX.  I've already stated mine.

		--ed		{edhew@egvideo.uucp}

  Ed. A. Hew     Authorized SCO Technical Trainer      Xeni/Con Corporation
  work:  edhew@xenicon.uucp	 -or-	 ..!{uunet!}utai!lsuc!xenicon!edhew
  home:	 edhew@egvideo.uucp	 -or-	   ..!{uunet!}watmath!egvideo!edhew
  # I haven't lost my mind, it's backed up on floppy around here somewhere!