Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!husc6!genrad!decvax!virgin!lance
From: lance@virgin.MV.COM (Lance Fraser)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix
Subject: Re: AIX vs VMS
Message-ID: <6471@virgin.MV.COM>
Date: 22 Mar 90 14:09:10 GMT
References: <9428@stiatl.UUCP>
Reply-To: lance@virgin.UUCP (Lance Fraser)
Organization: Virgin Software, Ltd., Nashua, NH.
Lines: 42

In article <9428@stiatl.UUCP> meo@stiatl.UUCP (Miles O'Neal) writes:
>buck@siswat.UUCP (A. Lester Buck) writes:
>|hascall@cs.iastate.edu (John Hascall) writes:
>|>     Hmmm, how novel...and how many years have these things been in VMS?
>|
>|And how many architectures does VMS run on?
>|
>|Oh, sorry.  I forgot we're not supposed to notice that putting features in
>|a portable operating system is much harder than to hack things in to a
>|particular machine.
>
>And how many architectures does AIX run on?
>
>Or, probably more importantly, how many different manufacturers'
>architectures? What? All IBM so far?
>
>Uh huh.
>
>-Miles

	Let's see in our office we use

		1.VMS
		2.Interactive Unix
		3.AIX
		4.AT&T Unix
		5.SCO Xenix 386
		6.SCO Xenix 286
		7.SCO Unix
		8.Microport Unix
		9.DOS (yes, really)

	The funny thing is I don't have anything bad to say about
any of them as a matter of fact there are good points to all of them.  
I guess we just enjoy what we do and we don't have to sit around
complaining about everything. Maybe we're just not smart enough to
know we should be complaining.

	Oh well, just thought I'd let people know that someone out
here is happy with what's happenning.

	---lance