From: david@dynamix.com (David L Jarvis)
Subject: Re: Xenix considered harmful (was Re: SCO support - a success story)
Organization:  SOFTWARE / DYNAMIX
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 10:31:11 EDT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA06503; Sun, 6 Sep 92 08:38:41 -0700
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA24123; Sun, 6 Sep 92 08:38:38 -0700
X-Received: from dynamix.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet)id AA24374; Sun, 6 Sep 92 11:35:22 -0400
X-Received: by dynamix.com (smail2.5c)id AA05493; 6 Sep 92 10:31:12 EDT (Sun)
X-To: comp.unix.xenix.sco.usenet (comp.unix.xenix.sco)
X-In-Reply-To: <BtznH6.Ez@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us>; from "Marc Unangst" at Sep 3, 92 6:03 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

> 
> My point was that he said he "never even considered Unix."  Now, how
> could he possibly know if Unix was or was not appropriate if he never
> even considered it?

So now instead of debating real issues with real facts, you want to pick
apart a sentence out of context and argue just a phrase.  
Well what say we take a look at the context that the above quote came from
and our exact exchange of words ... [exact quoting from past posts]

[Marc's words]
>> at an appropriate time.  For example, when they're considering an
>> upgrade from Xenix 2.3.2 to Xenix 2.3.4; or when they're considering
>> getting a new hard drive.

[David's words]
> I've upgraded plenty of 2.3.2 sites to 2.3.4 and never even considered
> Unix, and I know for a FACT that a LOT of very experienced and

You state that clients shouldn't upgrade from 2.3.2 to 2.3.4, and I said
that we've upgraded plenty of them and never even considered Unix as an
alternative ... now you're arguing that if I never considered it that I
can't possibly know which is best, and I say BULLSH*T ... if I choose Xenix
for a site and install it, then support it, and develop software for it, I
certainly get enough feedback to know if the solution I engineered for that
client is working or not ... and if a new version comes out like 2.3.4, I
know right away whether or not we should upgrade them or if we might better
be looking at something new like switching to Unix ... if the Xenix
solution we provided is working great and the client has not one single
need or want that we're not satisfying, we don't even consider switching
them to something new ... so tell me Marc, whats best for the client, a
system that does what they need (even if it is based on Xenix) or a system
based on Unix *regardless* of what they need ???

> >Whoaa.....  I have modems on EVERY SCO Xenix site out there, with NO 
> >problems.
> 
> Well, he said that Xenix was appropriate for customers who had no
> networking or security needs.  Modems are a form of networking, and as
> you mention, they work fine.  But putting a modem on a computer and
> leaving security turned off is just about as much of a security risk
> as putting the root password in /etc/issue.

Wrong ... most of our clients only turn on the modem when we're dialing in
for support or when one of their employees is dialing in from home or
another office ... you seem to think that everyone who has a modem 
is on the Internet ... not a single one of our clients is ... 
And even if the modem was on all the time, then what?  If I give you the
number of one of our Xenix systems, do you think you could break in?
Accounts that are properly passworded will thwart 99.9% of breakin 
attempts.  Each of our clients uses
our own custom developed system adminstration tools for administering user
accounts ... this software forces them to assign passwords to each account

> >out there for SCO Xenix than SCO UNIX (this may change).  We use
> >Lotus 123, WordPerfect 5x, WordPerfect Office, Realworld, Cougar,
> >TruFax, Call Tracker, The Medical Manager and many others....
> 
> Yes, those are all available in Xenix versions.  But pretty soon (it's
> starting to happen already), 

It is???  How about telling all of us what brings you to this conclusion?
I have not yet seen one single vendor say he's dropped Xenix altogether.
Could you give a reference or two for your claim?

> software companies are going to want to
> use Unix-specific features.  And when that happens, a lot of the
> smaller companies are going to ditch Xenix entirely and just put out a
> Unix version.  

Reall now?  Tell me, how does a high-school boy come to know what software
vendors are thinking?  I'd tend to think that a lot of them are thinking:
"gee, Xenix still has a big marketshare, and SCO is keeping it alive, I bet 
I could make a decent buck if I continued to make my product available for
it" ... so again, you've stated that "it's already started to happen" that
vendors are going to "ditch Xenix entirely", how about telling us just who
and what???

> Can you get FrameMaker for Xenix?  Or Corel Draw?

Nope.  Has anyone I've put on Xenix ever ONCE asked me for either 
of these???  Nope.  The people that have had these sort of needs have been
on ODT from the beginning ... 
My argument from the start has been that Xenix has it's place and Unix  
has it's place, and that we put BOTH out there at the appropriate times.  
You're argument has been that Xenix doesn't have an approriate place, 
and we've all asked you to justify this position, 
which you continue to sidestep.

> >>senior this year.
> > ^^^^^^
> 
> Your point being?  Or do you feel that I'm unqualified to participate
> in this discussion, because I'm still in high school?

I feel that you are unqualified to tell this group of experienced system
integrators how they should be taking care of their clients.  I also feel
you are unqualified to give an analysis of the Unix market and the business
computing industry in general.  Many of us are still providing Xenix as 
the core solution to clients computing needs, and we're trying to
explain to you just WHY we're doing that, but like so many young people
you are doing more talking than listening.  (and saying nothing)

This has nothing to do with your age, as you've obviously accomplished a
lot very early in life and seem to know where you want to go and what you
want to do with your life - for which I applaud you, since so many today
don't have a clue ... it also has nothing to do with technical knowledge,
as you no doubt have achieved some degree of that ... the basis for my
above paragraph is that you don't have the experience in the business world
to know what clients want/need to run their businesses ... and that *IS* 
the real goal of all this isn't it?  To provide a computing solution that
the client can use to effectively run his/her business, *NOT* to promote
some hyped up group of standards and force clients into a situation that
does not benefit them.


#----------------------------------------------------------------------#
#          David L. Jarvis                 SOFTWARE  /                 #
#          david@dynamix.com                       /  DYNAMIX          #
#----------------------------------------------------------------------#
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix.sco