Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site decuac.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!decuac!avolio
From: avolio@decuac.UUCP (Frederick M. Avolio)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Ultrix and 4.2 and der Mouse
Message-ID: <722@decuac.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 7-Dec-85 11:08:26 EST
Article-I.D.: decuac.722
Posted: Sat Dec  7 11:08:26 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Dec-85 03:08:38 EST
References: <1554@decwrl.UUCP> <1441@cornell.UUCP>
Organization: ULTRIX Applications Center, MD
Lines: 27

In article <1441@cornell.UUCP>, george@cornell.UUCP (George R. Boyce) writes:
>  ...
> ... Anyway, just *why* is it that Ultrix is bad for supporting computing
> in, say, a computer science department??

It is fine for such an environment.  Sometimes a customer will ask me
why they should get Ultrix-32 rather than pay less and get 4.2BSD.  I
tell them that Ultrix-32 is more than just 4.2BSD.  It is a commercial
product.  Some things have been added and some have been fixed.  Also,
one can get updates, bug fixes, and access to Digital'support force
including a 24 hour hotline, an Ultrix Dispatch, automatic reporting
and tracking of SPRs, etc. (And if you are having trouble with any of
the above-mentioned services *and you have paid for them* you should
raise a stink!)

But, and this is what I think Armando was getting at, if you have no
use for any of that, if you do all your own support, if your goal is
to make massive changes to the kernel (essentially voiding the
warrantee) then you might do better to go with a non-commercial
product.  No commercial OS product that I know of is set up to allow
the customer to make changes to it and stil be supported by the
company.

Well, anyway, it's one man's opinion.  In other words in no official
capacity...
-- 
Fred @ DEC Ultrix Applications Center    {decvax,seismo,cbosgd}!decuac!avolio