Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen From: davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: In What Sense is Sun the "First" Open Systems Manufacturer? Message-ID: <2940@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> Date: 21 Nov 90 15:15:51 GMT References: <1990Nov16.225515.494@zoo.toronto.edu> <1990Nov20.195623.28061@Neon.Stanford.EDU> Reply-To: davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) Organization: GE Corp R&D Center, Schenectady NY Lines: 26 In article <1990Nov20.195623.28061@Neon.Stanford.EDU> andy@Theory.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes: | 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. Where did you get the info? I didn't realize that IBM gave Amdahl and the others the plans for their CPU and let them make it. Actually I thought they were reverse engineered. Does the license to manufacture include the right to use the software, like SPARC? | 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. Bear in mind the the TDB is intended to protect IBM, not benefit the public. Not that it isn't useful, but it's not a gesture of goodwill. The basic idea is that once IBM decides they can't make money by using or licensing an idea, they tell the world, so no one else can patent it. A cheap way to assure that if they ever do decide to use it they won't have to pay for it. -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) VMS is a text-only adventure game. If you win you can use unix.