Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hplabs!hpda!motcsd!mark
From: mark@motcsd.UUCP (Mark Jeghers)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Why unix doesn't catch on
Message-ID: <313@greek.UUCP>
Date: 6 Apr 89 19:46:07 GMT
References: <3177@imagen.UUCP> <[2282.13]karl@ddsw1.comp.ibmpc;1>
Reply-To: mark@greek.UUCP (Mark Jeghers)
Organization: Motorola Computer Systems, Cupertino, CA.
Lines: 30

In article <[2282.13]karl@ddsw1.comp.ibmpc;1> karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM ([Karl Denninger]) writes:
>>Response 12 of 12 (2282) by bright at Data on Tue 4 Apr 89 2:24
>>[Walter Bright]
>>Unix suffers from two killer problems:
>>1. Lack of media compatibility.
>
>   Well, perhaps.  This is lessening FAST.  This also depends on what you 
>mean by compatibility as well.

"Lack of media compatability" in this case largely boils down to different
floppy formats.  It should be noted, however, that there is quite a LOT of
media compatability in the area of tape drives.  9 track open reel mag tapes
have an enourmous compatability base, and emerging standards for cartridge
tapes are getting there too, although perhaps to a lesser degree.


>>2. Lack of binary compatibility.

>Xenix will also run all '286, '186, and 8086 binaries compiled on previous 
>versions of SCO (or other) Xenix's.  
>
>No binary compatiblity?  Where have you been?

In addition, groups such as 88open are moving towards Binary Code Standards,
which will increase the domain of binary compatability in UNIX.



Mark Jeghers
Motorola Computer Systems