Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!vsi1!indetech!fiver!palowoda
From: palowoda@fiver (Bob Palowoda)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Summary: What's wrong with SCO (long)
Message-ID: <1991Apr19.165229.893@fiver>
Date: 19 Apr 91 16:52:29 GMT
References: <1991Apr18.063914.13111@kithrup.COM>
Organization: Fiver Communications, Fremont, Ca
Lines: 27

From article <1991Apr18.063914.13111@kithrup.COM>, by sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan):
> In article <1991Apr17.210627.4517@beaver.cs.washington.edu> pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis) writes:


>>Someone will decide to
>>change something more fundamental, and suddenly, there will be even
>>more significant differences than there are now.
> 
> Too late.  The POSIX stuff SCO added is incompatible with the stuff ISC
> added.  Point in SCO's favor:  AT&T and Intel have adopted sco's
> implementation for the iBCS thingy; as a result, ISC is not compatable with
> the standard, and any isc-written COFF program will not work on future
> releases.  Oh, well.  (*I* kept urging people to get in touch with ISC and
> get some coherency.  Mostly I mumbled to myself, I will admit.)

   This is interesting, how are they going to sell this product?  Will it
be an update?  How much will it cost?  When will the customer know when they
need it? Why should a customer pay for it?  How does this affect ESIX, and 
Dell UNIX products?  What are the advantages?

---Bob

-- 
Bob Palowoda   palowoda@fiver.uucp         |   *Home of Fiver BBS*
Home {sun}!ys2!fiver!palowoda              |                          
     {pacbell}!indetech!fiver!palowoda     |  
                                           | 415-623-8806 1200/2400/19.2k TB+