Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!deimos.cis.ksu.edu!eecea!terry
From: terry@eecea.eece.ksu.edu (Terry Hull)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Why unix doesn't catch on
Message-ID: <625@eecea.eece.ksu.edu>
Date: 15 Apr 89 22:28:46 GMT
References: <7697@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <258@jwt.UUCP>
Reply-To: terry@eecea.eece.ksu.edu (Terry Hull)
Organization: Kansas State University, Manhattan
Lines: 27

In article <258@jwt.UUCP> john@jwt.UUCP (John Temples) writes:
> 
>Now that Microport appears to be defunct, I wonder how WordPerfect Corp. feels
>about entering the 386 Unix market.  Will this frighten off other prospective
>Unix developers like Lotus?  I suppose Unix will survive through it all, but
>can it succeed commercially?  

A couple of things here.  Number one, I expect that companies like Sun
and SCO were the ones that pushed WPC into doing a UNIX port of
WP 4.2.  I think WPC made it available for uPort because it did
not cost them too much extra.  Does anyone know how the installed base
of SCO, Sun, and uPort compare?  BTW:  I have a client using WP 4.2
and when I called WPC tech support I got correct answers fast.  What a
change from some of the other software vendors I call.  (And, don't
forget WP support is FREE.)  


Secondly, I think that major software companies like Lotus will look
more at the incredible growth of SCO than they will at the failure of
uPort.  



-- 
Terry Hull 
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Kansas State University
Work:  terry@eecea.eece.ksu.edu, rutgers!ksuvax1!eecea!terry
Play:  tah386!terry@eecea.eece.ksu.edu, rutgers!ksuvax1!eecea!tah386!terry