HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: adams@pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de (Adams)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Date: 27 Jan 93 23:58:37
Organization: TH-Darmstadt
	<ADAMS.93Jan25230527@PDV2.pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de>
	<1993Jan26.153926.19840@texhrc.uucp>
	<1993Jan27.194451.19461@crd.ge.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de
In-reply-to: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM's message of 27 Jan 93 19:44:51 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.194451.19461@crd.ge.com> davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen) writes:

>   | Even if it were stable, the PC architecture is ugly.  
>	It makes optimization
>   | expensive, and executables larger.

>     Measuring the size of executables will tell you that's just not true.

We were talking about the architecture of a PC, not of just one part,
the x86 CPU.

Optimization: Please have a look at EISA. Today it seems to be as expensive
as VMEBus, both beeing at least as expensive as S-Bus. Capabilities of 
first is FAR INFERIOR to those of the latter both.
(It occurs to me, that some companies use it as a bus to limit the
performance of their systems artificially, DEC and HP come to mind, to
prevent competition against their own higher-priced models.)

>   Virtually all RISC machines waste 2 or 4 bytes for every instruction,
>   and demand that immediate constants be 2 or 4 bytes. 
That some RISC architectures waste bytes and thereby memory bandwith 
was never doubted, again SGI (former MIPS), DEC and HP come to mind.
BUT: This is not a natural law at all, remember Transputers.


> The Intel CPUs,
>  whatever else they do poorly, allow one byte opcodes, one or two byte
>   constants, and do not require allignment.

Well, but the cache to DRAM interface requires alignment. It may be
tremendously inefficient to read just one byte of 16 bytes 
(common size of cache line). Punishment about 20 (in words: twenty) 
wait cycles.

>     Compile any reasonably large program and look at the size of the
>   object file. The intel is smaller in every case.
Well, 68x leads to at least as dense code, VAX same.... Some 'riscy"
designs, like Z32H00, are said to achieve at least as dense code as 68k.

best, adams
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: larry@trauma.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: 16550 support in SCO UNIX?
Organization: Gator Communications - Feeds-R-Us 219-289-3745 
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:22:19 GMT

cambler@zeus.calpoly.edu (Christopher J. Ambler, Phish) writes:

>Question is, then, does there need to be software support for the 16550's
>enhancements? Does just plugging in the chip into the serial card not
>help?

According to net info, the 16550AFN is directly supported by SCO.  

If you want, a better alternative would be to install the FAS driver
which is available from any one of a number of sources..


-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.use.com
keeper of the Gator                                   uucp: uunet!gator!larry
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
From: felixg@coop.com (Felix Gallo)
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Organization: Cooperative Computing, Inc.
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:14:11 GMT
Followup-To: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general

larry@trauma.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>jon@jonlab.UUCP (Jon LaBadie) writes:
>
>>In fact, I question the stability issue.  It is my "SUBJECTIVE"
>>impression that there are many more discussions of problems with
>>SCO UNIX that other flavors.  Yes, they have a larger installed
>>base, but from the breadth of problems, I don't think that is the
>>sole reason.  Again, just an impression from reading netnews,
>>not hands on experience.
>
>It could be that a higher percentage of SCO users are less
>Unix educated than other Unix users?

Actually, this is almost certainly the case from a user standpoint.
Many companies (including mine) use SCO as a base for a nearly-
opaque software platform.  End users, at least for us, rarely
see a real shell prompt and almost never have to understand the
syntax of 'sed' or 'awk'.

However, you were probably trying to be insulting to the people
who use SCO to implement their business goals, rather than are
the target of those business goals.  Since you have earlier in
these newsgroups stated that you're not involved in any sort of
actual business whatsoever -- and since several statements of
yours have revealed that you really don't know anything about
Unix in a business environment -- you really should just stop
yapping.

As a brief educational business primer: SCO provides services
which all other companies (especially Dell) do not.  Their
support for peripherals is unmatched, and the Corollary bus
support allows us to have systems in the field which can
service an order of magnitude more people than any other PC
Unix can.  It's all very well to note that Dell's Unix is
nice, but systems analysts very much smarter than Larry Snyder 
have chosen SCO over and over and over again for actual real-
world applications.  And we haven't done it just because we
like the color of the box.  We do it because SCO gives us
what we want for less overall cost than other vendors can.

>Or it could be that SCO is so highly modified that standard
>reference book examples don't work with SCO.

Nonsense.

>Or, the SCO users don't read manuals.

If our SCO customers are reading SCO manuals, then something's wrong
with our product.

>-- 
>Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.use.com
>keeper of the Gator                                   uucp: uunet!gator!larry
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
From: bruno@athena.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (Bruno Hall)
Subject: On knocking .edu folks (was: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors)
Organization: McGill University (in the .edu domain)
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 22:22:28 GMT

witr@rwwa.com writes:

[ bunch of stuff deleted -BH ]

>(Of course, I know that those of you in the .edu domain believe or
>are taught to believe that everything is either free or should be free.
>So I suggest you ask your professor for the drive.)

Do tell us, Robert, how much did *you* (as a non-.edu domain person)
contribute to MIT since you're using X?  How much money did you send
the FSF when you installed gcc?  How about when you installed emacs?

Foo.

Bruno
-- 
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Bruno Hall  |  VE2HUM  |  bruno@mcrcim.mcgill.edu         
McGill Research Centre for Intelligent Machines - Controls Group
New systems generate new problems -- Join the Flat Earth Society.
Xref: sparky comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:1305 biz.sco.general:5531 comp.unix.sys5.r3:389 comp.mail.misc:4491 news.admin:8813
From: merce@xenitec.on.ca (Jim Mercer)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.mail.misc,news.admin
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Date: 25 Jan 93 01:14:40 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Reptilian Research, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA

Robert Withrow (witr@rwwa.COM) must have had a bad day when he wrote:
> (Of course, I know that those of you in the .edu domain believe or
> are taught to believe that everything is either free or should be free.
> So I suggest you ask your professor for the drive.)

what next? anyone who lives under .su is a pinko-commie spy?
those living under .ca are backbacon gorging log-cabin dwellers?
us under .org (see .sig) are unconventional enough to be .com?

.com used to mean commercial, now it seems to mean any jerk who can afford
a couple MX'rs.
generalizing is a bad way of arguing. not to mention you just shot your

credibility with are large number of people to hell.

-- 
[ Jim Mercer   Reptilian Research  merce@iguana.reptiles.org  +1 416-506-0654 ]
[                      longer life through colder blood                       ]
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.sys5.r3,biz.sco.general
From: tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen)
Subject: Re: The Future of ESIX (was Re: PC-clone UNIX Software Buyer's Guide)
Organization: Waterloo Engineering Software
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:01:18 GMT

> tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:
>> Those PCs, except for *1* (that's my brother's), run Kermit from the time
>> they boot to the time they are shut down.  That's it.  Why should I buy
>> Ethernet cards and TCP/IP+NFS for PCs (remember, that costs you an easy
>> $250 per seat) when they have no need for it?

les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
> Let's see if I understand this... It's OK to buy a PC and just use it as
> a serial terminal, but it's not OK to have some currently uneeded features
> built into the unix system???

First, they didn't *buy* those PCs to run Unix -- they had them for their
previous system.  It was cheaper to use the existing diskette-based PCs as
terminals running Kermit (cost: $0) than to buy new terminals (cost: $500+
each).

Second, I have no problem in having NFS, TCP/IP, development and X included
in the base package -- I'm just saying that they don't always add value. 
It really does depend on your application!

[ \tom haapanen    "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
[ tomh@wes.on.ca                   "trust the programmer" -- ansi c standard ]
[ waterloo engineering software      "to thine own self be true" -- polonius ]
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (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
Date: 27 Jan 93 19:44:51 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <1993Jan26.153926.19840@texhrc.uucp>, pyeatt@Texaco.com (Larry D. Pyeatt) writes:

| Even if it were stable, the PC architecture is ugly.  It makes optimization
| expensive, and executables larger.

  Measuring the size of executables will tell you that's just not true.
Virtually all RISC machines waste 2 or 4 bytes for every instruction,
and demand that immediate constants be 2 or 4 bytes. The Intel CPUs,
whatever else they do poorly, allow one byte opcodes, one or two byte
constants, and do not require allignment.

  Compile any reasonably large program and look at the size of the
object file. The intel is smaller in every case.

  Comments about speed are reasonable, but the size comment is readily
proven by inspection to be an Intel win.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
	A terible poker player can have a great hand,
	A obnoxious fool can have a good idea.
	Both are winners, regardless of who has them.
Xref: sparky comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:1329 biz.sco.general:5571 comp.unix.sys5.r3:410
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Date: 25 Jan 93 18:09:05 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <C1DEDz.Mvp@trauma.rn.com>, larry@trauma.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:

| I would love to have CDROMs mounted under Dell.  The question is, would
| I rather run SCO with CDROMs or Dell with no CDROMs?  Actually, I'm waiting
| for upgrades -- if nothing happens within the next 9 months -- who knows
| what my next operating system will be?

  I believe that someone is porting the stuff from Linux to V.4, but
don't quote me, I just saw a comment to that effect in a posting. I'd
love to do it, but there are no more hours for play...
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
	A terible poker player can have a great hand,
	A obnoxious fool can have a good idea.
	Both are winners, regardless of who has them.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.sys5.r3,biz.sco.general
From: fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home)
Subject: Re: The Future of ESIX (was Re: PC-clone UNIX Software Buyer's Guide)
Organization: CompuData Inc.
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 07:08:34 GMT

les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes:

>Let's see if I understand this... It's OK to buy a PC and just use it as
>a serial terminal, but it's not OK to have some currently uneeded features
>built into the unix system???

I believe the man said his brother uses some PC software for which he 
transferrs data from the UNIX box to the PC. Apparently this is not the case 
for the salesman on the floor who may only have to look up a price on a dumb 
terminal. The whole situation is quite typical of an average shop.

fred
-- 
W. Fred Rump 	office:	   fred@COMPU.COM     "A man's library is a sort of 
26 Warren St.   home: fr@icdi10.compu.com 	harem" - Emerson (1860) 
Beverly, NJ. 08010                          		 
609-386-6846    bang:uunet!cdin-1!icdi10!fr   
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: Dean.Roth <Dean.Roth@mixcom.mixcom.com>
Subject: UNIXWare - anyone using it?
Organization: Milwaukee Internet Xchange BBS, Milwaukee, WI U.S.A.
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 01:18:26 GMT


Is anyone using UNIXWare, Univel's (Novell's) product?
Could you please send me your evaluation of the package
(software & docs). Thank you.

Dean
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
From: jpsb@NeoSoft.com (Jim Shirreffs)
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:47:44 GMT

Just thought youmight like to know, My management has started encouraging
me to port our application to NT. I love Unix, but....

jim shirreffs

Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: chjo@huldra.tdata.no (Christer Johansen)
Subject: Portable Netware for SCO?
Organization: Tandberg Data A/S, Oslo, Norway
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:53:55 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

[ Article crossposted from biz.sco.general ]
[ Author was Christer Johansen ]
[ Posted on Wed, 27 Jan 1993 15:39:44 GMT ]

I need some advices from the net on this one.

We have an MS-DOS application that needs to be accessed from both
X-terminals and PC's running MS-DOS. The MS-DOS application must
be installed on a server as it depends on a sentral database.
(Or at least the database must be installed on a server).

The X-terminals are connected to either a Sparc Server running SunOS
or a i486 running SCO ODT 2.0.

Some of the PC workstations that needs to access the application is
running Novell Netware and some is running PC-Interface.

I'm thinking of installing the application on one of our i486 machines
that is running SCO ODT 2.0. In that way I believe the workstations
that is running PC-Interface can connect directly to that server
(it is running the PCI server) and start the application from there.

It should also be possible to NFS mount the application directory to
the servers running SunOS and ODT 2.0, and the X-terminal users on
these machines should then be able to access the application using
SoftPC on the Sparc Servers and vp/ix on the servers running ODT 2.0.

My problem then seems to be the PC workstations that is running Novell
Netware. My local SCO dealer told me that SCO was in the prosess of
porting Portable Netware, but then they laid down the project for some
reason.

I guess I could install PCI on the PC's running Netware (I know they
can coexist), but the pricetag for doing this seems to be quite high
as I'll need one PC-Interface license for each PC and there's a lot
of them.....

My questions are:

1> Does anyone know if any 3rd party developers have a version of
   Portable Netware for SCO?

2> If no to question 1, do you have a suggestion for an alternative
   setup. Maybe UnixWare (which I know very little about) as a server
   will do the trick?


Thanks in advance
Christer Johansen
--
Christer Johansen, Tandberg Data A/S, PO Box 9, Korsvoll, N-0808 OSLO 8, NORWAY
Phone +47 (0)2 189090, dir +47 (0)2 189527  Fax +47 (0)2 189550
Internet: chjo@tdata.no    IEA: ibmmail(26692)
X.400: C=no; A=telemax; P=tdata; O=tdd; S=chjo

--
Christer Johansen, Tandberg Data A/S, PO Box 9, Korsvoll, N-0808 OSLO 8, NORWAY
Phone +47 (0)2 189090, dir +47 (0)2 189527  Fax +47 (0)2 189550
Internet: chjo@tdata.no    IEA: ibmmail(26692)
X.400: C=no; A=telemax; P=tdata; O=tdd; S=chjo
Xref: sparky comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:1410 biz.sco.general:5708 comp.unix.sys5.r3:473
From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Date: 28 Jan 93 15:19:47 GMT
Organization: MCSNet, Chicago, IL

In article <C1JDsr.1oM@wimsey.bc.ca> sl@wimsey.bc.ca (Stuart Lynne) writes:
>In article <1993Jan27.152657.11295@sbcs.sunysb.edu> shane@cs.sunysb.edu (Shane Bouslough) writes:
>>Jon LaBadie (jon@jonlab.UUCP) wrote:
>>
>>The problem with your analogy is that SCO is a *subset* of Dell, while
>
>Certainly not. Dell has no where near the features that SCO has. Think
>in terms of support, availability through sales channels, peripheral
>support, applications, third party products, user training, sales training,
>marketing support, ...... 

Definitions:

"support"	- We might fix the bug you just found that crashes the
		  system if you pay our "support fee".  (My argument is that
		  if you got what you paid for in the first place 95% of the
		  "support" job would be unnecessary).

"applications"	- Name one which runs on SCO that will not execute on DELL.

"availability through sales channels"	- Its spelled "O.V.E.R.H.E.A.D."

"peripheral support"	- That's one more item we can incompletely handle
			  so you can pay us (again) for "support" (see item
			  1 above)

"applications"	- Again, if they're cross-platform compatible, what's the
		  beef?  I run my FOXBASE Xenix version on DELL daily.

"third party products"	- The ones I care about are supported by their
			  makers, who have a stake in seeing that their
			  drivers work right (otherwise they don't sell
			  much product, do they?)  The OS vendor has much 
			  less of such stake.

"user training"	- Another phrase for "you can't sell the customer something
		  they can use without it?"

"sales training"	- See "marketing dreck", particularly in the case 
			  of SCO and ODT dealer "qualification".  More
			  frequently called "propping up profit margins by
			  restricting the number of competitors in an area".

"marketing support"	- See "overhead" again.


--
Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900]
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: multics@lachesis.acm.rpi.edu (Multics)
Subject: Re: The Future of ESIX (was Re: PC-clone UNIX Software Buyer's Guide)
Organization: The Voice of Fate
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 01:53:25 GMT

In article <102@shady.UUCP> kevin@shady.UUCP (Kevin Smith) writes:
>In article <C198AH.D47@trauma.rn.com> larry@trauma.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
> : >fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home) writes:
> : >
much deleted

>These folks aren't dumb but they have enough to do entering orders, sending
>out invoices and making their widgets.

as one of those people supporting the dumb user I have to greatly agree
with kevin.

I've got calls for help where someone had accidently unplugged a peripheral,
the cleaning crew had unplugged something and the customer called us for
assistance.

TRUE STORY:
We had a call from a customer whose system would not boot. It had an
external disk drive.  After spending 15 mintues checking indicator
lights, operator pressing proper keys, the power lights being on, the
customer finally mentioned there was some smoke coming from the disk drive.
THEY DID NOT CONNECT THE SMOKE TO THE SYSTEM NOT BOOTING!!!!!
-- 
Richard Shetron  multics%acm.rpi.edu@rpi.edu  multics@hermes.acm.rpi.edu
What is the Meaning of Life?      There is no meaning,
It's just a consequence of complex carbon based chemistry; don't worry about it
The Super 76, "Free Aspirin and Tender Sympathy", Las Vegas Strip.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3
From: fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home)
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Organization: CompuData Inc.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:59:33 GMT

karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:

>When was the last time any of you folks out there actually got a compiler
>bug fixed in, oh, say, SCO's compilers?  I remember bitching about some
>problems for over two years in their Xenix compiler -- while on support --
>and <never> receiving a fix.  So much for "official support".  Trust me,
>their lack of producing a fix won't stop them from charging you the annual
>or upgrade maintenance fee.

>My life has been spent working around compiler problems in people's
>products.  Compilers that produce bad code.  Optimizers which mangle code
>and cause core dumps.  Linkers that won't.

For once we agree. The problem with the SCO (read MS) compiler is that SCO has 
little control over it. It least that was the story from the folks who worked 
in that area. The long lists of 'things' just kept getting longer. GNU was the 
answer to the problem. I'm not sure where the real fault lies here or why MS 
can't do a better compiler. I mean the have the horses and resources.

In any case, I'm not so quick to throw this problem into SCO's lap. As far as 
I know they were and are more of an integrator that an original developer. I 
don't think it was in their scope to write YAC (yet another compiler).

Fred
-- 
W. Fred Rump 	office:	   fred@COMPU.COM     "A man's library is a sort of 
26 Warren St.   home: fr@icdi10.compu.com 	harem" - Emerson (1860) 
Beverly, NJ. 08010                          		 
609-386-6846    bang:uunet!cdin-1!icdi10!fr   
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
From: jon@jonlab.UUCP (Jon LaBadie)
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 08:41:06 GMT
Organization: JG Computing

In article <1993Jan24.230151.8266@sbcs.sunysb.edu> shane@cs.sunysb.edu (Shane Bouslough) writes:
>And to all you SCO'ers out there who are going to say "Yeah, but we
>don't need all that stuff.", the point is
>
>	IF THE COST IS THE SAME OR LESS, WHY *NOT* GET THE EXTRAS?

I find myself in the strange position of arguing for SCO when I
do not find it appealing.

A car buyer considering a Bently or a Ferrari may be talking the
same dollars and may feel the features of one vs. the other are
"extras".

To me, a unixphile, player and explorer, the "extras" of Dell's
unix are very appealing.  That is why I bought it.

To my local hardware store owner, the difference in SCO's several
hundred files vs. Dell's several thousand can be daunting.  And
there is always the possibility of increased interaction between
these "extra" applications and user confusion.  Simple example,
there must be 4 or 5 mail readers available on Dell.  I don't know
about SCO, but I suspect it is mail or mailx.  A lot easier to
deal with, administratively and training-wise.

SCO's position seems to be if you get an extra package, expect more
complexity and support costs.  If you need networking and go with
TCP/IP, expect more cost; both upfront and in support.

My big gripe with SCO is the cost and currency factors.  With so
many customers (relative to DELL, etc.) and such a high price,
why can't SCO keep the product current AND stable?

In fact, I question the stability issue.  It is my "SUBJECTIVE"
impression that there are many more discussions of problems with
SCO UNIX that other flavors.  Yes, they have a larger installed
base, but from the breadth of problems, I don't think that is the
sole reason.  Again, just an impression from reading netnews,
not hands on experience.

-- 
Jon LaBadie
princeton!jonlab!jon
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3