Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!killer!dcs!wnp From: wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport Subject: What is an acceptable O/S for a 286? (Was: Re: microport memory) Message-ID: <96@dcs.UUCP> Date: 26 May 88 11:20:32 GMT References: <53709@sun.uucp> Reply-To: wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) Distribution: na Organization: DCS, Dallas, Texas Lines: 27 In article hedrick@aramis.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) writes: >However I am reluctant to recommend SV/AT in any configuration, lest I >mislead people into believing that I endorse it. I had originally >written a long paragraph describing the reasons I can't stand SV/AT. >(My problems are not with Microport specifically, by the way, but with >System V.) Because this group has generally been mercifully free of >flames, I've decided to omit it. However I would like to be sure that >no one interprets my participation in this group as meaning that I >consider system V release 2 as an acceptable operating system, >particularly for a personal computer. Well -- would you care to tell us what **IS** an acceptable OS for a personal computer? MS-DOS? OS/2? Why, then, are you using UNIX System V? And what, specifically, makes UNIX System V Release 2 so unacceptable? Now that you have whet our appetites, let us hear it! There is a difference between reasonable criticism and flames (although many netters don't seem to know that difference). By all means lets have reasonable criticism -- after all this is not comp.ostrich (head in the sand) :-). -- Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101 UUCP: ihnp4!killer!dcs!wnp ESL: 62832882 INTERNET: wnp@DESEES.DAS.NET or wnp@dcs.UUCP TLX: 910-280-0585 EES PLANO UD