Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!rutgers!clyde!watmath!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: All this Microport Flaming: A solid Vote for XENIX
Message-ID: <1264@looking.UUCP>
Date: 30 Dec 87 17:17:05 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> <2605@killer.UUCP>
Reply-To: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
Distribution: na
Organization: Looking Glass Software Ltd.
Lines: 24

In article <2605@killer.UUCP> wnp@killer.UUCP (Wolf Paul) writes:
>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 have to take exception to this.  With Xenix, you get several MEGS of useful,
carefully written software, dozens and dozens of man-years in the development,
extensive manuals and the multitasking OS.  Compare this with the majority
of software products out there and how they're priced.

The C compiler is the Microsoft C compiler.  You lose Codeview but you get
cross development for two environments.  For $150 you get troff -- compare
that with desktop publishing systems.

The fact is that Xenix is more software for the $ than 99% of the stuff
out there.  If this makes it "way overpriced" then you are extravagant in
your claims.

Microport is also more software for the $ than 99.5% of the stuff out there,
and more than Xenix.  But instead, I would call it way underpriced, possible
only because what Microport mostly does is licence the AT&T stuff.  I fear
that Microport doesn't charge enough to provide the support necessary for
most customers.  They will thrive only if this support (bug finding,
device drivers etc.) comes from their users.
-- 
Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473