Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!lethe!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rphroy!teemc!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake
From: shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aux
Subject: Re: A/UX concerns
Message-ID: <250@raysnec.UUCP>
Date: 18 Feb 91 17:46:45 GMT
References: <8570@etsu.CMI.COM>
Organization: IRS/CI - Technical Solutions Branch
Lines: 22

kevinh@cmi.com (Kevin Hegg) writes:

>Another concern I have is Apple's suppresion of information on Mach for 
>the Mac. Here's what I have heard. CMU ported Mach to all Mac II's except 
>the ci and fx. Apple took it from there and is possibly negotiating with 
>mt. xinu for distribution rights. OK Apple, what are you going to do? Are 
>we going to see a commercial product with Mach? If not, how about relaxing 
>your stranglehold on Mach. 

	The A/UX operating environment is far more comprehensive than
simply providing a kernel and utilities. Its ability to support both 
UNIX and Mac applications simultaneously without resort to emulation is
certainly remarkable. Unless the alleged Mach ports can offer something
comparable there's little reason to choose it over A/UX.

	As to the "suppression of information" and "stranglehold on Mach"
I can only suggest you try to control your paranoia. Unless you can provide
evidence to the contrary, consider that superior technology usually wins
out in the end.

-----------  
uunet!media!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake				shwake@rsxtech