Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!crdgw1!sungod!davidsen
From: davidsen@sungod.crd.ge.com (ody)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: Unix for a 386.
Message-ID: <1790@crdgw1.crd.ge.com>
Date: 21 Aug 89 17:09:54 GMT
References: <1989Aug16.020438.5662@esegue.uucp> <7186@megatest.UUCP>
Sender: news@crdgw1.crd.ge.com
Reply-To: davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen)
Organization: General Electric Corp. R&D, Schenectady, NY
Lines: 26

In article <7186@megatest.UUCP> palowoda@megatest.UUCP (Bob Palowoda) writes:

|   Some companies (like SCO) sell a two user version with no upgrade path.
|   Remeber the days when unix came as real *unlimited* user system with
|   no other standard.

  Please quote your source for this statement, such as an order number.
I ordered about 40 copies of Xenix over the years, and I have not seen
any such version. If it's available it would be useful, if it's false
you should correct yourself.

|   [pass me the flame thrower please] 
|   What happen some got in there and said here's a 
|   good market trick.
| 
|   [FLAME ON!!] 

  Someone noticed that UNIX was being run on all these little machines,
and that it would be nice for a single user PDP-11 to be able to have a
less expensive license, with one user being the console and one for
remote use. Is there something wrong with the idea of having a cheaper
version of something which satisfies the needs of many users at a lower
price? Why the flame?
	bill davidsen		(davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM)
  {uunet | philabs}!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me