Xref: utzoo comp.os.minix:7799 comp.sys.ibm.pc:37460 comp.unix.xenix:8371
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!ander
From: ander@pawl.rpi.edu (Michael R. Primm)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: IBM and Apple Operating Systems (Re: dosread.c again)
Message-ID: <1989Nov2.161049.16900@rpi.edu>
Date: 2 Nov 89 16:10:49 GMT
References: <6661@ficc.uu.net> <10609@cbnews.ATT.COM> <143@asihub.UUCP> <843@dvnspc1.Dev.Unisys.COM> <23598@cup.portal.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Lines: 21


Re: IBM not shipping state-of-the-art

OS/360 DEFINED the state-of-the-art when it shipped back in 1965...what 
operating systems were drifting around before then?  not very much.

Also, OS/2 has been out for about 2 years now, has supported threads for all
that time (which most ALL UN*Xs still don't support), Dynamic Link Libraries
(wditto, although many are starting to support it), and, more recently, 
installable file systems.  For a single user networkable workstation, what
other "state of the art" do you want?

Also, funny thing about state-of-the-art.....nothing stays "state-of-the-art"
for more than a week or so.

Lastly, customers are a rather important factor when you're producing a product.
Staying state-of-the-art is all fine and good, except if you abandon all your
customers along the way....everyone wants new features and more power, but not
if 10+ years worth of software investment is getting tossed in the process.
                                        
                                                         --Mike Primm