Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!van-bc!sl
From: sl@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca (Stuart Lynne)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: Interactive and me - An open letter to ISC.
Message-ID: <867@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca>
Date: 14 Jul 90 18:47:06 GMT
References: <3126@rsiatl.UUCP> <783@digi.lonestar.org> <1990Jul13.223922.13623@ico.isc.com>
Organization: USENET Public Access, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Lines: 33

In article <1990Jul13.223922.13623@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes:
>cfoughty@digi.lonestar.org (Cy Foughty) writes:
>> Please don't flame me to hard...
>
>>...OS/2 1.2 provides a much
>> better solution...
>
>[18 lines of opinion and misstatements about UNIX, followed by...]
>> This controversy only comes up when emotions are involved; look
>> from a logical standpoint and everyone will have a working system.
>
>I'd never realized how far superior OS/2 is!  And, silly me, I thought it
>was only available on PC-class machines.  I guess I just missed the
>announcements of versions we could run on our VAXen, Sun 3s, RTs, Sparcs,
>and RS/6000s...but if you say it's a viable solution, it must run on those

Don't be silly Dick. Everyone *knows* that hardly anyone uses those
machines. They don't run MS-DOS :-)

Personally I thought everyone was buying Unix for business so that they
could put large numbers of people on low cost systems. When OS/2 allows 
a business to put 24 people on a system doing word processing maybe it'll
go over.

OS/2 seems to want to function as low end single user workstation
environment. This is fine for many people who need that. But the many
businesses can't afford to even put networked DOS machines on everyones
desk. They would rather just put a small Unix box in that doesn't need to be
networked and still will support dozens of people doing simple things like
accounting or word processing.

-- 
Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca ubc-cs!van-bc!sl 604-937-7532(voice)