Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!bellcore!clyde!watmath!focsys!larry
From: larry@focsys.UUCP (Larry Williamson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport
Subject: Re: Microport V/AT DWB 1.0
Message-ID: <207@focsys.UUCP>
Date: 6 Oct 88 13:51:44 GMT
References: <162@carpet.WLK.COM> <205@focsys.UUCP> <168@carpet.WLK.COM> <206@focsys.UUCP> <212@dcs.UUCP>
Reply-To: larry@focsys.UUCP (Larry Williamson)
Distribution: na
Organization: Focus Automation Systems Inc. Waterloo, Ontario.
Lines: 62

In article <212@dcs.UUCP> wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) writes:
>In article <206@focsys.UUCP> larry@focsys.UUCP (Larry Williamson) writes:
>>I must agree with Bill Kennedy, Microport's DWB1.0 troff is infact
>>brain dead. All my efforts to get it to work with jetroff have been
>>fruitless. I am also quite sure that jetroff is not the culprit.
>>
>>I get the impression from the traffic in this news group that only
>>Mr. Kennedy and I are trying to use jetroff with SV/AT.  Is this true?
>>There must be more users out there? Are you complaining to microport?
>
>Some of us are complaining to Microport via E-mail, and not just 
>complaining, but suggesting solutions. There are efforts underway to
>make DWB 2.0 available to V/AT users.

1. I am glad to here that there is some move afoot to help us out here.

2. I sent email to uport, but it has bounced!, This is how I sent my
   email to uport:
	To: watmath!uport!techs
	Subject: SV/AT DWB1.0 troff trouble

	[ text deleted ]

this is what I got back!

	Subject: failed mail
	To: watmath!focsys!larry
	Message-Id: <8810042128.AA20048@suprt.UUCP>
	Status: R

	=======     command failed      =======

	 COMMAND: /bin/lmail 'jmsully' 'plocher'

	[and more text, mostly what I sent]


>>Why would microport want to fix a problem that is bothering only two
>>of there users, especially when one of them has found a solution to
>>his problem?
>
>Because there are at least some people even at Microport who care about more
>than the bottom line;

I don't argue this. Microport has still been my favourite unix vendor.

> however, if I were one of them, I would not respond to
>some of the complaints posted here either, seeing what tone they are in.

I seems obvious that my intent was poorly conveyed in my writing. I'd
like to think that I am not a uport basher.

>
>Seriously, I find that most companies react better to e-mail and phone calls
>than to constant bashing in a public forum like this.

Agreed.

Larry.
-- 
Larry Williamson  -- Focus Automation Systems -- Waterloo, Ontario
                       watmath!focsys!larry       (519) 746-4918