Xref: utzoo comp.unix.xenix:3341 comp.unix.microport:1544 comp.databases:1377
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!decvax!ima!spdcc!dyer
From: dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix,comp.unix.microport,comp.databases
Subject: Re: FoxBASE+
Message-ID: <1864@spdcc.COM>
Date: 15 Sep 88 13:45:51 GMT
References: <7341@cdin-1.uucp> <5138@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> <857@viscous> <334@telly.UUCP>
Reply-To: dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer)
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Lines: 20

In article <334@telly.UUCP> evan@telly.UUCP (Evan Leibovitch) writes:
]Someone from Fox Software told me by phone that SCO was in charge of
]determining priorities of all FoxBase Unix ports. If this is true, then
]SCO has shafted Fox Software out of much potential licensing revenue, in
]order to protect Xenix market share.
]...
]If Tim's schedule is true, then there is not even a port being developed
]in time for the Xenix/Unix merged 386 product.
]In the short term, the losers are Fox Software, and of course anyone who
]wants to use a dBASE clone on Microport, Interactive, etc.

Yap, yap, yap...Jeezuz, give me a break.  The whole point of the Xenix/UNIX
merged 386 product is that there won't have to be individual ports to both
flavors of 386 UNIX.  The current copy of Xenix FoxBase should run fine under
the merged port.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@harvard.harvard.edu
dyer@spdcc.COM aka {harvard,husc6,linus,ima,bbn,m2c,mipseast}!spdcc!dyer