Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!bionet!agate!shelby!neon!news From: andy@Theory.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: In What Sense is Sun the "First" Open Systems Manufacturer? Message-ID: <1990Nov20.195623.28061@Neon.Stanford.EDU> Date: 20 Nov 90 19:56:23 GMT References: <1990Nov16.225515.494@zoo.toronto.edu> Sender: news@Neon.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System) Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University Lines: 23 In article egdorf@zaphod.lanl.gov (Skip Egdorf) writes: >I think that the point is well made and that Sun (for all its faults) >is unique in the industry for such a long-term view. In that sense, it >is "an extraordinary action!" I also believe that this is the proper >way to ensure the domination of the SPARC architecture regardless of >the technical quibbles voiced so often (and often correctly!) in this >newsgroup. While they didn't have to be sued into doing it Sun, with SPARC, has done what IBM did decades ago with their 360/370 machines. Both allow others to produce hardware compatible systems. In what sense is Sun "first", let alone "unique"? What is its equiv of the IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin? Hint: disclosure via source code is convenient, but it isn't a guarantee of future compatibility. Considering the bugs in the distributed version, it isn't even a guarantee of current compatibility. -andy -- UUCP: {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!neon.stanford.edu!andy ARPA: andy@neon.stanford.edu BELLNET: (415) 723-3088