Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!reha
From: reha@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Reha Elci)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.ultrix
Subject: Re: Ultrix 4.2
Message-ID: <1991Jun20.234113.12858@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 20 Jun 91 23:41:13 GMT
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 20

In article <3459@geocub.UUCP>, lutmann@geocub.UUCP (Patrice LUTMANN) writes:
>|> 	Is it because the MIT sample server is more efficient?
>|> 	Is it because the MIT sample server is less buggy?
>|> 	Or is it because DEC does not care about us? What a cheek!

FLAME ON!!

What is this anal retentive wish to build the MIT server anyway?? DEC's servers
are faster, more reliable, and supported!!!! Extensions like DPS & PEX
are supported and avaliable which the public domain stuff does not have and
not likely to have working for quite some time!! On top of all that you have
working multi-head support. With the extensions they have out in field test
which are very close to production, the servers are so far ahead of 
anything else that its ridiculous to insist on the public domain stuff.
I also do not agree with the guy from DEC who dismissed DPS as useless!
Here is finally an extension that brings the obsolete bitmap & pixel based X
architecture to modern day standards and he dismisses it as clunky & useless.
What is wrong with you people??

FLAME OFF......