Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:12519 comp.society.futures:1127
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!shelby!Portia!forel!karish
From: karish@forel.stanford.edu (Chuck Karish)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: Future at Berzerkeley
Keywords: Leading Edge == Bottom Line
Message-ID: <1186@Portia.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 29 Mar 89 16:02:17 GMT
References: <4572@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <3095@stpstn.UUCP>
Sender: USENET News System <news@Portia.stanford.edu>
Reply-To: karish@forel.stanford.edu (Chuck Karish)
Organization: Mindcraft, Inc.
Lines: 18

In article <3095@stpstn.UUCP> aad@stepstsone.com wrote:
>In article <4572@pt.cs.cmu.edu> jps@cat.cmu.edu (James Salsman) writes:
>>a long time, but SysV will always be more stable.
>Let's see:  svr1,svr2,svr3,svr3.2,svr4...  Seems like they come out with
>versions a lot more often.

	Yes, but it's a stable development environment because AT&T
	specifies what backward compatibility they'll provide in new
	versions.  This may be carried a bit too far, to the extent
	that they're reluctant to fix misfeatures for fear of breaking
	customers' work-arounds.

	Any developer who's happy with the old functionality can
	ship products for the newer version of the OS without having
	to port to it.

	Chuck Karish	hplabs!hpda!mindcrf!karish	(415) 493-7277
			karish@forel.stanford.edu