Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!homxb!mtuxo!mtune!codas!killer!wnp
From: wnp@killer.UUCP (Wolf Paul)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: All this Microport Flaming: A solid Vote for XENIX
Message-ID: <2605@killer.UUCP>
Date: 29 Dec 87 14:10:53 GMT
References: <4610@well.UUCP> <394@ddsw1.UUCP> <255@spl1.UUCP> <2398@killer.UUCP> <438@cimcor.UUCP> <441@xios.XIOS.UUCP> <2589@killer.UUCP> <1987Dec28.174911.15313@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu>
Reply-To: wnp@killer.UUCP (Wolf Paul)
Distribution: na
Organization: The Unix(R) Connection BBS, Dallas, Tx
Lines: 29

In article <1987Dec28.174911.15313@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> poetry@gpu.utcs.UUCP (i.e.) writes:
>
>>Personally, I think those who expect the Microport product to be as bugfree
>>and stable as the other packages are just being unrealistic.
>>
>>...	I'd rather have a buggy product I can
>>afford to buy than a perfect product I can only admire in magazine ads and
>>USENET discussions.
>>
>
>I'm a user of Microport V/AT and don't drive a red Ferrari but this
>is an utterly preposterous argument.
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Why are folks on the net so quick to use derogatory language? And without
explaining what they mean, too.

Of course I'd rather have a bug-free product, if I can afford it, but XENIX
is way overpriced, and therefore comparing Microport with it is unfair.

I am sure that constructive criticism of the Microport packages by Microport
users is more likely to bring about bugfixes than flames and comparisons by
Xenix users who seem to have a need to justify to themselves and their bosses
the fact that they spent three times as much money.

Now, if anyone feels like calling me or my arguments by derogatory names,
please have the courtesy to explain your reasoning instead of just making
blanket statements.

Wolf Paul
ihnp4!killer!dcs!wnp