Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-ncis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!tolerant.UUCP!uucp
From: uucp@tolerant.UUCP (UNIX-UNIX Cp)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport
Subject: Submission for comp-unix-microport
Message-ID: <8901071046.AA07595@handel.TOLERANT>
Date: 7 Jan 89 10:46:58 GMT
Sender: uuclerk@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 32

Path: tolerant!voder!apple!rutgers!cmcl2!phri!marob!daveh
From: daveh@marob.MASA.COM (Dave Hammond)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport,comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: Which one:  Interactive, Microport, Xenix?
Message-ID: <445@marob.MASA.COM>
Date: 5 Jan 89 20:07:15 GMT
References: <2410@stiatl.UUCP> <324@belltec.UUCP>
Reply-To: daveh@marob.masa.com (Dave Hammond)
Distribution: usa
Organization: ESCC  New York City
Lines: 20

In article <324@belltec.UUCP> dar@belltec.UUCP (Dimitri Rotow) writes:
>In article <2410@stiatl.UUCP>, todd@stiatl.UUCP (Todd Merriman) writes:
>> Our company is trying to select a Unix (Sys. V) for 386.  On the
>> basis of: [...]
>> What are your suggestions?
>Ours, of course.  [...]

I have all the respect in the world for Dimitri Rotow and the
Bell Tech organization, but newsgroups are NOT an appropriate forum for
commercial advertisements. And the XENIX newsgroup, especially, is no place
for the president of Bell Tech to pitch his own (competing) firm's software.

I have nothing against satisfied consumers of a software package extolling
said package's virtues [in fact, I preach of SCO's qualities whenever
appropriate], however I find Mr. Rotow's article to be blatant commercialism
and out of character with the spirit of Usenet.

--
Dave Hammond
...!uunet!masa.com!{marob,dsix2}!daveh