Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!caip!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!strath-cs!jim
From: jim@cs.strath.ac.uk (Jim Reid)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: RFS, SYMBOLICS LM's, VAXEN
Message-ID: <142@stracs.cs.strath.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 22-May-86 07:55:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: stracs.142
Posted: Thu May 22 07:55:07 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 25-May-86 18:02:21 EDT
References: <4375@srcsip.UUCP> <135@stracs.cs.strath.ac.uk> <1017@inset.UUCP>
Reply-To: jim@cs.strath.ac.uk (Jim Reid)
Distribution: net.unix-wizards
Organization: Department of Computer Science at Strathclyde University, UK.
Lines: 16
Keywords: NFS

In article <1017@inset.UUCP> bill@inset.UUCP (Bill Fraser-Campbell) writes:
>As regards SUN competitors, several of those already have the source and
>several have completed ports (Gould, DEC, DG, Alliant, Celerity, Pyramid).
>SUN have decided that it is better to promote NFS than not.  There is a
>user group for implementors.

The competitors I had in mind were companies like Silicon Graphics, Masscomp
and perhaps Whitechapel. The big boys you mention have NFS, but they're not
really competing with SUN in the workstation market; rather, they're mainly
selling boxes for you to hang your SUN workstation off. To clarify my earlier
statement, it wouldn't make commercial sense for SUN to make NFS available
to companies that already make workstations that are either cheaper or faster
than the SUN equivalent. Why help your rivals improve their product with
something you have invested money and effort developing?

		Jim