NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/comp/unix/pcclone/32bit/1247

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-23 | 3.4 KB

Xref: sparky comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:1247 biz.sco.general:5440 comp.unix.sys5.r3:343 comp.unix.sysv386:17877
Path: sparky!uunet!crdgw1!rdsunx.crd.ge.com!ariel!davidsen
From: [e-mail] (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 22 Jan 93 19:59:06 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Required for NNTP)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY
Lines: 55
Nntp-Posting-Host: ariel.crd.ge.com

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Karl Denninger) writes:

| >  And you wind up with a legal copy of Xenix which has some resale
| >value.
|
| But today, not much.

Actually, Xenix is much better to run than UNIX in a laptop, unless you
really NEED the features. You can run Xenix in about 2MB, although 4 is
nicer. Can't do that with UNIX. (To slightly change the topic) I like
Dell for that, too, because I can put runtime, networking, C, and swap
in 70MB and have room for a few apps.

| I suspect that the Intel Unix systems may be doomed.  The introduction of
| low-cost Sparc-based systems could eat Intel's lunch.  The current offerings
| (and not just from Sun) are nice, fast, <cheap> and expandable through the
| network.

  I don't argue the point, but while the 8086 and 286 systems are gone,
Intel continues. And the 386 is vanishing as the 486 gets down to $300
or some more. If Intel ever chooses to ship the Pentium it should be
faster than the bottom of the line SPARC, etc, and the ability to run
DOS software is still important to some people. If someone were to ship
a RISC platform with an intact V.4 (instead of BSD) I'd be more
inclined. I like V.4 sysadmin and layout better than BSD, a rarity (and
I admin Suns and Ultrix at work).
|
| The other interesting thing is that "board level" products are now available
| for the "build your own clone" group.  The prices on these are coming down
| <fast>.  Again, they're much faster than the 486 systems of today.

  Another good point. The system board and frame buffer are the only
cost differentials these days, since memory, disks, and monitors are
essentially the same price for all platforms. We're using Sun 1GB SCSI
drives in PCs these days, because we got a good price on quantity.
|
| Then there is the application base.  Sparc systems have a reasonably good
| one.  PC Unix systems have a horrible one.

  True, but only for shrink wrapped apps, and lots of PC stuff is now
available for SCO (and runs on V.4, in my experience). While compiling
net stuff was really bad for Xenix, and is still a hassle for SCO (due
to header files), most V.4 will handle net source with only minor
changes at the makefile level. Not all, I agree, but when I got my
first V.4 I ported about 60 apps in a weekend, and most of the fixes
were genuinely non-portable code which was found with the compiler, not
the debugger.

  There's more software for Xenix/SCO UNIX than SPARC, and priced
better. As the vendors see a small system market, I believe some will
drop prices to gain market share.

--
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    Keyboard controller has been disabled, press F1 to continue.