Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!oliveb!felix!ccicpg!turnkey!jack
From: jack@turnkey.UUCP (jack)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: Microport -- Man or Myth??!?
Message-ID: <139@turnkey.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 26-Sep-87 18:10:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: turnkey.139
Posted: Sat Sep 26 18:10:15 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 30-Sep-87 01:03:21 EDT
References: <10154@beta.UUCP>
Organization: Turnkey Computer Consultants, Costa Mesa, CA
Lines: 33
Summary: Old cliche's ring true

In article <10154@beta.UUCP>, myxm@beta.UUCP (Mike Mitchell) writes:

[ hysterical account of the dealings with "MicroBlunder" deleted...]
Really, Mike, that was a classic, have you considered Hollywood :-} ?

> Are these guys for real?
 
One thing for sure, apparantly their Quality Control dept. isn't :-} !
 
> What's this? A commercial micro unix producer that actually ties into the
> net? Wow. Maybe there is someone out there that listens... We can hope.

I think the lesson to be gained from this, as cliche as it sounds, is that
you get what you pay for. This does not mean Microport is always the wrong
way to go (after all, we can always use an extra blank disk or 2 , and why
would a multiuser system need its serial ports to work anyway :-}), but
for someone not forced into that route due to budget I think one really gets
more for their money with SCO. Sure its a lot more to shell out, and sure
certain types are likely to make snide remarks about it not being true SysV,
but what the hell at least its a solid product. I would rather have a hybrid
that works than a "true port" that doesn't. Can you imagine telling a client
that the "fix" to a bug in a command is not to use the command!!

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are mine and my company's, although
	    I am sure SCO doesn't mind them either :-}.



-- 
Jack F. Vogel
Turnkey Computer Consultants, Costa Mesa, CA
UUCP: ...!uunet!ccicpg!turnkey!jack 
Internet: jack@turnkey.CTS.COM