Xref: utzoo comp.protocols.nfs:1927 comp.windows.ms:10181
Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!usc!alhena.usc.edu!ajayshah
From: ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.nfs,comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Sun PC-NFS deficiencies
Message-ID: <30971@usc>
Date: 12 Mar 91 17:41:15 GMT
References: <1991Mar11.232450.5556@amd.com> <1991Mar12.050857.24535@ccad.uiowa.edu> <29#=N#}@rpi.edu>
Sender: news@usc
Followup-To: comp.protocols.nfs
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 24
Nntp-Posting-Host: alhena.usc.edu

In article <29#=N#}@rpi.edu> barryf@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Barry B. Floyd) writes:
>Debating what a "network" is supposed to be seems besides the point. By all
>accounts Sun's PC-NFS seems to be deficienct in its compatibility with a
>Win 3.0 PC environment. A product released as PC compatible and Win 3.0
>compatible "should" IMHO be recognized by that environment (i.e. Win 3.0
>network configuration should be NFS, NOT "No Network"). 
Isn't this a problem with Microsoft Windows rather than with
PC-NFS?  I think it has (atleast in part) to do with Microsoft's
strategic distaste for Sun as a company -- you won't find a 
single program written by Microsoft for a Sun machine.  It's
important for Microsoft profits to not support Unix/NFS in any
way.

>None-the-less, let us hope that the next release of Sun's PC-NFS is all but
>user seductive; or they may find themselves out of this market, given
>competition from FTP, Novell (imagine!), etc.
What is this competition like?  So far, I know of only one good
competitor to PC-NFS, this is Beame and Whiteside.

-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ajay Shah, (213)734-3930, ajayshah@usc.edu
                              The more things change, the more they stay insane.
_______________________________________________________________________________