Path: utzoo!attcan!telly!lethe!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!udel!haven!decuac!lemans.dec.com!lemans.det.dec.com!libove From: libove@libove.det.dec.com (Jay Vassos-Libove) Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386 Subject: Re: Why DEC chose SCO UNIX Message-ID: Date: 3 Jan 91 17:34:46 GMT References: <2777E87B.6392@tct.uucp> <29027@usc> <29029@usc> <277916E3.2042@tct.uucp> Sender: news@lemans.dec.com Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Detroit Ultrix Resource Center Lines: 27 In-reply-to: chip@tct.uucp's message of 26 Dec 90 21:32:19 GMT In article <277916E3.2042@tct.uucp> chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) writes: I speak only for myself, not for DEC. From: chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386 Date: 26 Dec 90 21:32:19 GMT References: <2777E87B.6392@tct.uucp> <29027@usc> <29029@usc> >Moreover, in the process, DEC abandoned it's own ULTRIX >(DEC proprietary version of UNIX) in order to adopt SCO UNIX. SCO UNIX has ready support for *multiprocessing* (SCO MPX). ULTRIX doesn't. I'll bet that this consideration was probably the most important one. This advantage is utterly unrelated to any security issues. (Also, ULTRIX hasn't yet been ported to the 386; such a port would likewise be no small job, though infinitely easier than VMS.) Actually, Ultrix, as of version 4.0, does support multiprocessing. The DECSystem 5820, 5830, and 5840 are respectively 2, 3, and 4 processor models of an 18 MIPS RISC system, running Ultrix. -- Jay Vassos-Libove libove@libove.det.dec.com Digital Equipment Corporation decwrl!libove.det.dec.com!libove Detroit ACT/Ultrix Resource Center Opinions? They're mine, mine, all mine! Farmington Hills, Michigan and D.E.C. Can't have 'em!