Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!rochester!kodak!ektools!isctsse!pajerek
From: pajerek@isctsse.UUCP (Don Pajerek)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Why unix doesn't catch on
Message-ID: <206@isctsse.UUCP>
Date: 13 Apr 89 22:14:53 GMT
References: <1922@dataio.Data-IO.COM> <101000047@hpcvlx.HP.COM> <199@isctsse.UUCP> <978@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> <1483@ur-cc.UUCP> <983@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu>
Sender: daemon@ektools (The Devil Himself)
Reply-To: pajerek@isctsse.UUCP (Donald Pajerek)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Eastman Kodak Telecommunication Services, Rochester, N.Y. 14650
Lines: 30

In article <983@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright) writes:
>In article <1483@ur-cc.UUCP> pmjc@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Pam Arnold) writes:
>| Jim, note the name of this newsgroup. All of the great things that have
>| been done with Motorola processors are completely irrelevant to the IBM PC
>| community.
>| 
>| Pam Arnold
>
>Not to the point of fooling yourself into thinking the universe revolves
>around a single [processor, architecture, whatever].
>
>-- 
>Jim Wright


I think the point of this discussion is the success or lack thereof of
UNIX on IBM-PC type machines.  My original posting simply pointed out
that predictions of UNIX achieving wide use among PC users have been
premature because until now (i.e., 80386) users have not had a multi-tasking
solution that provided both adequate performance and complete upward
compatibility for their existing DOS applications.

As long as these are the criteria, the universe DOES revolve around a
single processor (processor family, actually).  I am not questioning
the merits of the Motorola processors.  I do maintain, however, that
developments in the Motorola world don't bring PC users one bit
closer to having a viable UNIX environment on their PC's.


Don Pajerek