Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tiamat!chromc!dynasys!jessea
From: jessea@dynasys.UUCP (Jesse W. Asher)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: I will not honor comp.unix.sco
Message-ID: <243@dynasys.UUCP>
Date: 26 May 90 01:58:40 GMT
References: <236@dynasys.UUCP> <390@van-bc.UUCP> <15494@bfmny0.UU.NET> <1239@chinacat.Unicom.COM> <7516@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM> <187@shiloh.UU
Reply-To: jessea@dynasys.UUCP (Jesse W. Asher)
Organization: Dynasys:  Consulting for the Future.
Lines: 16

In article <187@shiloh.UUCP> kmoore@shiloh.UUCP (kirk moore) writes:
>I think that if Microport has a group, then it is to be expected that the 
>other vendors will want one to. Since Microport has it own group, then SCO
>should nbe allowed. I will carry the group.
>

As with the aix group, microport is an extremely small group of unix users
whose needs cannot be met by any other group.  They are not contenders in the
unix market and will not be in the future.  Your comparison of microport to
other vendors of unix (such as SCO) is falicious.


-- 
Jesse W. Asher - Dynasys - (901)382-1705     Evening: (901)382-1609 
6196-1 Macon Rd., Suite 200, Memphis, TN 38134  
UUCP: {fedeva,chromc}!dynasys!jessea