Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!killer!loci
From: loci@killer.UUCP (loci!clb)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att
Subject: Re: UNIX-PC Unix version (2 or 3)
Message-ID: <3975@killer.UUCP>
Date: 2 May 88 18:16:30 GMT
References: <135@sysadm.UUCP> <953@hsi.UUCP> <430@jonlab.UUCP>
Organization: The Unix(R) Connection, Dallas, Texas
Lines: 33
Summary: my 7300 did succeed

In article <430@jonlab.UUCP>, jon@jonlab.UUCP (Jon LaBadie) writes:
> In article <953@hsi.UUCP>, stevens@hsi.UUCP (Richard Stevens) writes:
> > The 3b1 UNIX is truly a hybrid of System V, Release 2.0 (enhanced version)
> > and System V, Release 3.0.  ....
> I must strongly disagree!
> True, paging and shared libraries (and record locking) are in both systems.
> ... 
> ... Had the PC succeeded,
> the plan was to make release 4 of the UNIX-PC software compatible with
> ...
> 

	Had the PC succeeded? Mine succeeds just fine. In my view there
	is an enormous gulf between what AT&T sees as a success and true
	success. The measure of computers should not be entrusted to so
	many greedy bean counters.

	The 7300 works much better, much more reliably and much faster
	that the pdp-11 (version 7) or the Altos xenix boxes that I
	have worked with in the past. You have to be a nit-picker to
	find things that don't work, whereas many other systems have
	so many bugs that they crawl all over. And any one who tries
	to do useful work with an MS-DOS machine knows what a mess that
	is.

	Just because the company that (doesn't) supports the machine
	can't succeed for their own folly is no reason to blame the
	machine, it's design or it's function. Money is all they
	understand... not excellence or utility or value. Just the
	almighty buck. As an engineer and programmer, I reserve the
	right to decide for myself.

				Charles Brunow
				clb@loci.UUCP