Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!van-bc!bjm!brian
From: brian@bjm.wimsey.bc.ca (Brian J. Murrell)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Unix vendors in general/Esix
Message-ID: <1991May7.043649.12113@bjm.wimsey.bc.ca>
Date: 7 May 91 04:36:49 GMT
References: <24566@well.sf.ca.us>
Organization: none
Lines: 26

nlane@well.sf.ca.us (Nathan D. Lane) writes:


>Our company has just started selling Unix software and the hardware to
>run it on due to my insistence and unix experience - we chose Esix
>primarily because of support policies; but that's not the point of this.

>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
        ^^^^
I surely hope that when you say "the standard set by AT&T" you mean the
various open systems consortiums to which AT&T belongs, and not AT&T
the single.

My point here is that why should one company get to set the standards
by which we all live and compute by?
 
LONG LIVE OPEN SYSTEMS!!

>adhere to the standard?  Only straying when ABSOLUTELY necessary?
>They'd be happy with a bigger market, we'd be happy with more software.
-- 
__________ ___   ____       _________________________________________________
          /  /    /  /|  /|  (604)520-3808           uunet!van-bc!bjm!brian
         /--:    /  / | / |  New Westminster B.C.    
_______ /__/ /__/  /  |/  | _________________________________________________