Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnewsj!apb
From: apb@cbnewsj.att.com (Amrit Bains)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: SVR4.0
Message-ID: <1991Apr10.030210.8285@cbnewsj.att.com>
Date: 10 Apr 91 03:02:10 GMT
References: <9104051959.AA23768@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <1991Apr6.184400.47303@cc.usu.edu>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 30

In article <1991Apr6.184400.47303@cc.usu.edu> jrd@cc.usu.edu writes:
>In article <9104051959.AA23768@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>, DA462CS@OPIE.BGSU.EDU writes:
>> ... deleted...
>> the different vendors.  At this time I can get AT&T SVR4.0 at a good
>> price, this is my choice right now.  Is there any benefit in going with
>> the other guys: Interactive, SCO, ESIX, UHC????  Price is not a concern 
>> because personally I don't think the AT&T stuff is that expensive... I
>> don't want to start any religious wars here, just some helpfull comments
>> please...
>> 
>> 			Thanks in advance...
>> 			Michael L. Gantz
>> 			DA462CS@opie.bgsu.edu
>---------------
>Michael,
>	Two pieces of free advice:
>	1. determine the state of device driver support for each Unix.
>	2. determine whether your machine will even boot that Unix. For
>example, most AMI Bios machines I've checked will not boot AT&T's SVR4,
>but a Phoenix Bios is just fine.
>	Joe D. (I have an AT&T SVR4 systems a'building)


I have an 386/25 System with an AMI BIOS I have successfully run both
AT&T SVR4.0 Ver 2.0 & AT&T SVR4.0 Ver 3.0.  We have several SVR4's running in
the building.

Amrit Bains
USL
abains@attunix.att.com