home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:1366 biz.sco.general:5661 comp.unix.sys5.r3:441 comp.unix.sysv386:17929
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
- Path: sparky!uunet!peora!gator!larry
- From: larry@trauma.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
- Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
- Message-ID: <C1JFLu.IKn@trauma.rn.com>
- Organization: Gator Communications - Feeds-R-Us 219-289-3745
- References: <C1D9uo.BuE@ddsw1.mcs.com> <1993Jan26.222549.9231@compu.com> <C1IBDx.L73@wimsey.bc.ca> <2B668E09.296B@telly.on.ca>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:20:16 GMT
- Lines: 32
-
- evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch) writes:
-
- >As from support for third parties, there is a gap but it is narrowing.
- >Softening the blow is the fact that in many instances, "SCO" drivers
- >work fine on R4 systems, especially for intelligent serial cards. How
- >many R4 drivers work under SCO?
-
- I know the 3.2 Unix ISC/SCO drivers for the Digiboard don't work
- under Dell SVR4 2.1
-
- >The gap has existed to date because SCO has (correctly) been seen as the
- >industry leader in market share.
-
- That is "self proclaimed industry leader"
-
- >driver development, of course they're going to do SCO drivers first, if
- >for no other reason than there are more SCO boxes out there based on
- >history. This is no statement on technical superiority, stability, or
- >anything else.
-
- That is because Xenix licenses are included in the total SCO license
- count that is circulated
-
- >two examples. Thomas Roell, author of (possibly) the best X server
- >available on Intel UNIX, explicitly prohibits the use of his code on SCO.
-
- I noticed that as well. He as well as many here on the net refuse to
- deal with SCO for various reasons, even political.
-
- --
- Larry Snyder internet: larry@gator.use.com
- keeper of the Gator uucp: uunet!gator!larry
-