Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ptsfa!ames!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Who owns Unix(tm)?...
Message-ID: <6378@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 1-Sep-87 04:43:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.6378
Posted: Tue Sep  1 04:43:15 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 2-Sep-87 07:11:20 EDT
References: <1665@ncr-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <8381@utzoo.UUCP> <797@Pescadero.ARPA> <2303@xanth.UUCP> <1292@houdi.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 12

In article <1292@houdi.UUCP> marty1@houdi.UUCP (M.BRILLIANT) writes:
>I don't think UNIX(tm) is making AT&T rich.  At best, it's offsetting
>the money we're losing in the computer hardware business.

I can understand some companies thinking they're in the business of
moving iron (although it ruined Signetics, the RCA computer operation,
and others too numerous to mention).  However, why in the world would
AT&T, which was (is?) in a unique position to establish dominance
over the telecommunications industry, and which owned the software
property with the greatest long-term leverage ever, decide they needed
to sell small computer systems in competition with outfits like IBM?
(Some of their computers are even pretty nice, but what a waste.)