Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!ico!rcd
From: rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Unix vendors in general/Esix
Message-ID: <1991May3.203336.6532@ico.isc.com>
Date: 3 May 91 20:33:36 GMT
References: <24566@well.sf.ca.us>
Organization: Interactive Systems Corporation, Boulder, CO
Lines: 42

nlane@well.sf.ca.us (Nathan D. Lane) writes:
> To Unix vendors:
> 	Is there such a thing as generic software?  Isn't that the point
> 	of unix - it should run on nearly anything.
> I have been talking with numerous vendors (18 so far) who basically say
> "we don't support Esix;" - typically, for PCs they only support SCO.

Yes, there is "generic" software.  The whole 386 UNIX marketplace has been
somewhat careless about this.

The situation is complicated from several directions:
	- Application vendors may not have the understanding of what is
	  vendor-specific and what's common to all UNIX systems.  In any
	  event, they probably don't have the resources to test their
	  software on all flavors of UNIX.  This is messy.
	- Some OS vendors may encourage the perception that an app will
	  only run on their version of UNIX.  In fact, they could work with
	  an app vendor to encourage use of facilities specific to their
	  OS, thus locking the app to one UNIX variant.  I don't know if
	  this is done, but it's certainly possible.
	- In V.3, there are some things which should have been standardized
	  but weren't (such as local X client-server interface).

Seems to me it would help if there were a baseline UNIX system the app
vendors could test against, such that if their software ran on the base
system it ought to run on any UNIX.  I don't know of anyone taking this
approach.

> I must say that there are standards for Unix software - the standard
> set by AT&T - not SCO, not Interactive, not Esix.  Why don't vendors
> adhere to the standard?  Only straying when ABSOLUTELY necessary?

As far as I can tell, most vendors DO adhere to the basic UNIX set of
facilities as it comes from AT&T; it's just that this base is not well-
understood and well distinguished from vendor-specific extensions.

Why don't vendors adhere more closely and stray less?  Because they want
to sell their software, so they extend it in ways they believe will make
it more valuable to end-users than their competition's product.
-- 
Dick Dunn     rcd@ico.isc.com -or- ico!rcd       Boulder, CO   (303)449-2870
   ...If you plant ice, you're gonna harvest wind.