NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #1/NN_1993_1.iso/spool/comp/unix/misc/4818

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-04 | 5.3 KB

Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:4818 comp.sys.novell:11058
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.sys.novell
Path: sparky!uunet!iphase.com!grima
From: [e-mail] (Gary Rima)
Subject: Re: Novell to buy USL !?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Gary Rima)
Nntp-Posting-Host: coolcat_ne0
Organization: Interphase Corporation, Dallas Texas
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 16:07:03 GMT
Lines: 97

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Marc Rassbach) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Rima) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Heston) writes:
>>>Yes. Novell isn't, which is one of the things that concerns me a lot.
>>Well, I've watched this thread passively 'till now, but just can't let that go
>>unchallenged.  IMHO, Novell is associated with "open systems".  Witness on one
>
>And I have too..... and now I'm going to put in my $0.02.
>
>No need for the source licencing on spx/ipx, as I understand Novell has
>released some specs to the PD.  I also agree with the gent from Comm Week
>who said this is a harrbringer to the spx/ipx going away.
>
>>I'm afraid you're making the old mistake of assuming that "open" and
>>"proprietary" are opposites - they're not!  "Open" and "closed" are opposites
>
>My fear is that Unix licences won't be as wide-spread.  So there won't be
>multiple vendors for a '386 world.  I'll be REALLY worried if the Novellians
>come forth with an Apple-sh proclimation:  "We are comitted to high profit
>for our stockholders"
>
>Novell would show it's "openness" by letting BSDI do it's thing.  Let the
>markets decide.
>
>>and look for a moment.  In terms of total number of attached nodes worldwide I
>>believe you'll find Novell's IPX is the dominant protocol - bigger than TCP/IP.
>
>Your point?
>
My point was in rebut to Gary Heston's cry that "NetWare doesn't support
standards.  Just trying to point out that based upon usage, which I feel is the
best definition of "standard" as opposed to somebody proclaiming something
standard, SPX/IPX IS the (a) standard.
>>In spite of this Novell does offer full support for TCP/IP and NFS - even though
>>it's an option.  Generic UNIX, OTOH, doesn't provide direct support for NCP and
>>SPX/IPX.  It was left to Novell to provide both of these services for UNIX
>>platforms.  Now, who's more "open"????
>
>Until recently, IPX/SPX specs weren't released to the 'public domain'
>
Thanks for pointing this out.  I hope Heston is reading, since this rebuts
another of his claims against Novell.  SPX/IPX specs are now available PD.
>>Ah, so if Novell takes UNIX and adds integral support for NetWare protocols
>>and services, thereby making it more "open" you now choose to refer to that as
>>"hacked up".
>
>No, I think it's the rumor I've heard.  Goes like this.  A Novell promo
>about how 'wonderful' this new Unix offering is going to be.  Simplifyed.
>All those commands no one uses will be gone.  Like sed, awk, grep.
>Perhaps 'hacked up' isn't a good word....how bout busted.
>
Well, as your .sig satirizes, just because there has been a rumor repeated on
the net by Novell bashers doesn't make it true.  I know some of the marketing
folks at Novell and the promo about simplifying UNIX refers to additions, not
deletions.  Installation and administration have been made easier, Windows 3.X
programs will run, choice of X or MS-like Windows interface, etc.  I'll be quite
surprised if all the traditional utilities disappear.
>>>>On one hand, Novell has made real efforts to adopt and *promote* more
>>>>"traditional" UNIX networking technologies based upon TCP/IP standards
>>>twice the price again! (100 user 3.11 lists for $6995, 3.11 NFS for $3995,
>>>and Dell SysVr4 for $1600, last I heard.)
>
>Gary [Heston], now tell the REST of the story.....how much for the dos end
>clients that give equivalent funtionality to a novell connection?  If
>you know of some PD/low cost solutions, let me know, ok?
>Otherwise, Novell wins, cuz you don't spend 'per seat' like the Unix
>solution.  (PC-NFS)
>
Very good point.
>
>My view on the whole thing:
>1 - Unix is destine to be data-base servers etc.  Novell doesn't have
>a product that does a good enuf job.  They do now.  (assuming the buy goes thru)
>2 - Novell has some money.  Rather then 'invest' it in, say, land or
>pork bellies, they are doing the best thing they can with it....investing it
>in themselves in the form of buying out a piece of pie they don't have.
>3 - Novell wants to be the Micro$oft alternative.  (Is this a
>profitable thing to be?  Don't know)
>
I actually agree pretty closely with your viewpoint.  Just widen out data-base
server to read application server.  NetWare will continue to dominate as the
basic file/print server, UNIX will become more tightly integrated as an
application server as well as an available choice for the desktop.
>
>>Centurion N7358E                    [e-mail]
>Centurion?  As in the 'national chain' of computers?
>
Nope.  Centurion is the model name of my beloved Cessna 210, N7358E is its
tail number.  My main net participation is in rec.aviation.  There is more to
life than computers!!!!
>--
-Gary-
--
Gary L. Rima                        Interphase Corp.
PP-ASEL-IA                        [phone]
Centurion N7358E                    [e-mail]
N0GR                            CompuServe 76050,231