Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!research!dmr
From: dmr@research.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Marketing Unix
Message-ID: <1034@research.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 30-Jun-84 03:07:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: research.1034
Posted: Sat Jun 30 03:07:15 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Jul-84 06:38:24 EDT
Lines: 28

Remarks are already rolling in on the LA Times article quoted by Will
Martin; here's a reaction from one who observed the process.

1) It's a fact that fees for universities for all licenses through 32V
(and thus through 4.2BSD) are negligible, and though lawyers and pedants may
cringe at the phrase "give away thousands of copies ... to students"
this was the effect.  System III and V educational licenses are a lot more,
but still, I think, pretty cheap. "Dozens" of universities understates;
"hundreds" is more accurate.

2) There can be little quarrel with the assertion that this licensing
policy was essential to the market success of Unix.

3) To suggest that the popularity of Unix (let's ignore the past year
or so when national ads began to appear) owes to clever
marketing is sheer lunacy.  Imagine the fate of the hot young marketeer
who advises "Well, let's test it for 8 years in the universities at
below-cost prices.  Think of the brand loyalty we'll build."

The fact is that we had to fight every step of the way to get Unix
out the door.  The usual argument against each release was:  if this
stuff is really good, our competitors (yes, AT&T saw competitors even
well before divestiture) will take it and use it against us!
As it happened, the sensible people mostly won.  However, any resemblance
between the actual process and what is commonly thought of as marketing
is distinctly coincidental.

		Dennis Ritchie