NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/comp/unix/pcclone/32bit/1300

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-23 | 3.5 KB

Xref: sparky comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:1300 comp.unix.sys5.r4:1385 comp.unix.sys5.r3:384 biz.sco.general:5524
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.sys5.r3,biz.sco.general
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!ddsw1!karl
From: [e-mail] (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: The Future of ESIX (was Re: PC-clone UNIX Software Buyer's Guide)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 23:14:25 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: MCSNet, Chicago, IL
Lines: 58

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Haapanen) writes:
>[e-mail] (Larry Snyder) writes:
>> Sure, how about Delvelopment?  How about NFS/TCP?  How about X11R5?
>> How about users wanting to run DOS under Unix?
>
>My brother is running SCO Unix at a car dealership on a standalone 386/40.
>They have not a single monitor or terminal capable of graphics, and they
>have no need for any graphics -- why would they want X11R5?  They only
>have a single Unix box, with terminals and PCs hooked in through serial
>lines to an Equinox intelligent serial card -- why would they want TCP/IP?
>They run DOS and Windows apps on DOS and Windows machines -- why would they
>want DOS Merge?  They have not a single C programmer on staff -- why would
>they want the development system?

Becomes some day your brother is going to get the bright idea that all those
DOS PCs are actually USEFUL as more than just terminals.  Someone is going
to want to run a spreadsheet against the data on their "mainframe".  Now,
you get to deal with a bunch of bullpucky doing that -- where if they had
TCP/IP and NFS you could buy an <off the shelf> network package such as B&W
NFS and link them in -- then you just mount the disk and off you go.

Not to mention that you can then print to the network printers.

>Seriously, Larry, please try to understand that in many cases, the extras
>that you get with Dell (or whoever) are worth Zero.  Zilch.  Zip.  Nada.
>And that means that a full Dell package at $1295 gives them exactly the
>same functionality as the base (unlimited-user) SCO package -- and the base
>SCO is even priced lower than Dell's $1295.

They're only worth zero until someone gets a bright idea and wants some of
those features.  Then they have <real> value.  Even more if you have to go
buy them again for someone else's OS.

>Yes, we run SCO right now.  We may or may not stick with SCO in the future,
>but I'll always base that decision on our needs, and on what package will
>meet them.  Getting stuff that we (or our clients) don't need won't make
>me (or them) any happier.  I'll evaluate each system individually and try to
>make the right decision.


>...or maybe run a Unix application all day (in my brother's case, they have
>an integrated Progress-based dealership management system, plus Microsoft
>Word for Unix).  Hey, that's real work to a lot of people...

Oh, now there IS an actual application.

Being able to extract data from Progress and then use it directly is a big
plus.  But heh, with SCO, you get to pay another what?  $1000 ?? to be able
to link in those PCs?

Let's not forget that if you DO go the TCP/IP route you can get rid of the
Equinox (slow serial) and go with Ethernet instead.  At under $100 a board
nowdays for "cheap PC cards" you can have the benefits at <no> additional
cost over that which you would pay for the Equinox card.

--
Karl Denninger ([e-mail], <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [[phone]]