HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: staceyc@sco.COM (Stacey Campbell)
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 20:36:48 GMT


In article <2B668E09.296B@telly.on.ca> evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch) writes:
>There are also a small (but growing) list of drivers written for R4 that
>aren't available for SCO, mostly done on the net. SAS and XFree86 are
>two examples.

I have occasionally wondered why public domain or free X servers are
unported to SCO systems and I suspect the reason is that the stock X11R4
server that runs under ODT 1.1 (and later versions of ODT) offically
supports nearly all name brand mass market video hardware as well as
some the more esoteric high-speed hardware.

We currently do not support generic ET4000 VGA clones, though support for
this type of card will become available in our X11R5 release.  If someone
is aware of a popular mass market card used on x86 Unix systems that we do
not support we certainly are interested in hearing about it and evaluating
whether we should support that hardware in future releases.

>Thomas Roell, author of (possibly) the best X server available on
>Intel UNIX, explicitly prohibits the use of his code on SCO.

Thomas and I have corresponded (via e-mail) for a while now since we both
at one time or another have been doing similar X server work (for different
people :-) and I believe that Thomas is more dismayed with some of the
corporate policies of SCO than with, say, any individual here. :-)

I have never run an X server written by Thomas, I do know that his ATI Ultra
server smokes through the xbench tests very quickly.  But I suspect that
if you put SCO's stock X11R4 server against a server for the 8514/A written
by Thomas an average user running an average graphical spreadsheet,
WYSIWYG editor, mailer, or drawing program would be hard pressed to tell
which server is which.

We (tediously) test our X servers against all popular third party X clients
that run on SCO Unix in an attempt to make sure there are no nasty
performance or drawing surprises for the user.  Again, if you are running
such a client and are having any problems that are SCO X11R4 server
related mail me or post now so I can submit a bug and see if we can get
the problem resolved before we code freeze our X11R5 release.
-- 
          Stacey Campbell - staceyc@sco.com - uunet!sco!staceyc

                         "mathematically alive"
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
From: larry@trauma.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Organization: Gator Communications - Feeds-R-Us 219-289-3745 
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:16:01 GMT

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?

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

Or, the SCO users don't read manuals.

-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.use.com
keeper of the Gator                                   uucp: uunet!gator!larry
Xref: sparky comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:1307 comp.unix.sys5.r4:1387 comp.unix.sys5.r3:391 biz.sco.general:5533 comp.unix.sysv386:17901
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: 28 Jan 93 19:49:42 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <2B6750A8.180B@telly.on.ca>, evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch) writes:

| >availability through sales channels,
| 
| This is a bug as much as a feature, depending on your experience. There
| are tons of know-nothing charlatans out there selling SCO, and the
| authorization procedure didn't stop them one bit. Being available
| through sales channels isn't much of a feature if you bought your
| product from a "VAR" who dumped product in your lap and buggered off.

  *TRUE*

| People who have really done their own shopping might like the approach
| of direct marketing --- and, no question, Dell wrote the book on direct
| marketing of computer wares. Their effort to build a VAR channel is
| pitiful, but I expect that from a company that's made a reputation by
| cutting out the middleman.
| 
| A really good reseller/VAR will be much better than a voice at the other
| end of an impersonal 800 phone line. But that phone line is still better
| than a *bad* reseller (and there are still tons around).

  I have to agree. SCO got rid of some good VARs, and some bad ones are
still out there. Of course most V.4 vendors either don't sell through
VARs, or have very low margins, or require such expensive training that
it's not worth selling.

-- 
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,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
From: bruno@athena.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (Bruno Hall)
Subject: Re: On knocking .edu folks (was: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors)
Organization: McGill University Broom Closet
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 04:45:40 GMT

witr@rwwa.com (Robert Withrow) writes:
>In article <1993Jan21.222228.19299@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu>,
>
>| 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?
>
>Sorry pal.  Nice try, but you loose.  Perhaps I'm stupid, but I've actually
>*bought* releases from FSF instead of UUCPing them, or I get them from people
>who donate a portion to the FSF.  I buy the printed manuals, instead of
>printing them off myself.  I've bought distibutions from MIT for X,
>including the manuals. I've sent my $100 to the 386BSD folks.  

Bought?  Wait a sec here...  I don't recall seeing any mention of FSF
stuff being for sale.  In fact, it isn't for sale.  From the preface to
the emacs manual:

"... If you find GNU Emacs useful, please *send a donation* to the Free
Software Foundation. ...".

So if you believe that you've bought yourself a copy of gnu*, you're
wrong.  You just sent a (somewhat misguided) donation to the FSF.

>I also *pay* for my connectivity to the network...

That's nice; so do I.

>But thanks for proving my point for me.  It's obvious that the thought
>of paying for something is so foreign to you that you honestly can't 
>believe that anyone would actually do it.

Better not have children, Robert, they'll co$t you so much you might
not have enough to pay for your net.access.  On the other hand, maybe
that wouldn't be a bad thing entirely.

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.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
From: shane@cs.sunysb.edu (Shane Bouslough)
Subject: Re: On knocking .edu folks (was: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors)
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, State U of NY at Stony Brook
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:07:00 GMT

John De Armond (jgd@dixie.com) wrote:

: shane@cs.sunysb.edu (Shane Bouslough) writes:
: 
: >: Sorry pal.  Nice try, but you loose.  Perhaps I'm stupid, but I've actually
: >: *bought* releases from FSF instead of UUCPing them, or I get them from people
: >: who donate a portion to the FSF.  I buy the printed manuals, instead of
: >: printing them off myself.  I've bought distibutions from MIT for X,
: >: including the manuals. I've sent my $100 to the 386BSD folks.  I also *pay*
: >: for my connectivity to the network...
: 
: >Not so fast Kemosabe. Do you actually think the price you paid comes
: >anywhere close to fair market value for what you got? I hope you don't
: >think that. Sure, you paid what they asked, but let's be honest. Did
: >you buy one distribution tape of FSF or X code and use it more than
: >once?
: 
: By definition he paid fair market price for the products because he paid
: what was asked.  That's kinda obvious to us .com people.  Actually he paid 
: more than fair market price because fair market price is zero for FSF stuff, 
: again by definition.  And we haven't even discussed yet the tax subsidies
: we .coms get to pay to such projects.

You actually think paying $0 for a product that other companies charge
thousands for is *fair market value* just because Stallman has decided
to give GCC away? You really think that?!?

My definition of fair market price is $cost_to_produce + $profit_market_allows.
You think all of a sudden a high quality compiler costs nothing to
produce or maintain, and all of a sudden users refuse to pay profit?
FSF is a mutant in the world of business. It's actions are in no way
controlled by capitalist forces. How can you include their price structure
in *any* discussion of fair market value?

: >Lighten up, dude. A few less trips to the coffee machine might do you 
: >some good.
: 
: As would a trip to Econ 101 for you.

I bet you live for alt.flame.

: John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
: Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? 
: Marietta, Ga                         | Send ur snail-mail address to 
: jgd@dixie.com                        | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag
: Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.

-Shane

--
Shane Bouslough       | #include <stddisc.h>
shane@sbcs.sunysb.edu | "Follow your bliss" - Joseph Campbell
From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: AAA: Archive, Adaptec, AARRRGH!
Date: 25 Jan 1993 02:44:24 -0500
Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI
NNTP-Posting-Host: mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us

In article <C1DpA5.GDv@athena.cs.uga.edu> fuller@athena.cs.uga.edu (James P. H. Fuller) writes:
>  1) First off, the SCSI card (Adaptec AHA-1542B) jumper settings:
>         1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 1 1 1     * Pairs 4 and 5 jumpered, 6 not:
>                           0 1 2 3       (SCSI Address ID = 4)

Here is your first problem.  SCSI ID numbers *cannot* be duplicated on
the bus; in this case you have both your host adapter and your tape
drive set to ID 4.  There's no reason to change the host adapter from
the stock setting of ID 7, usually.

>                                       * Pair 12 jumpered, pair 13 not:
>                                         (DMA transfer speed = 5.7mb/sec)

This may or may not cause problems.  You should probably start with
the DMA speed set to 5MB/sec; your tape drive certainly is going to be
the bottleneck here, not the ISA bus transfer rate of the controller.

>        ---------                        (On-card BIOS enabled; tried both
>        o o o o o                        enabled and not enabled)
[...]
>        1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8                * Pairs 2, 3, and 4 not jumpered:
>        ---------------                  (AT I/O port = 334H) (* see below)

Well, here's the next problem.  If you change the I/O address of the
host adapter (as you have done), then you need to disable the on-card
BIOS, since it expects the controller to be at I/O address 0x330.
Since you don't need to boot from a hard drive connected to the 1542,
I'd just leave the BIOS disabled and skip the 1-2 minute wait on
bootup while the BIOS probes the SCSI bus for hard drives.

> 3) Tape drive (Archive 2150s) jumpers:

These look fine.

>        the pin 1 end of the connector.  The connector at the tape drive has
>        no indication which is pin 1; presently the red edge of the cable is
>        right next to the jumper array but this was a random guess and I've
>        got a 50% chance of getting it wrong.  Whatever happened to keyways
>        and other forms of idiotproofing?

Well, *my* 2150S has a keyed SCSI connector.  In any case, pin 1
should be to your right as you look down from the top of the drive.

>I did try to check out the hardware under DOS with DEBUG and the on-card
>test routines (-g=dc00:9).  The diagnostic introductory message comes up, and

You probably don't want to use the tests at DC00:9.  You'd be better
off using the routines at DC00:6, which will display a listing of
everything found on the SCSI bus.


-- 
Marc Unangst, N8VRH         | "Of course, in order to understand this you
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   |  have to remember that the nucleus of the atom
                            |  is squishy."
                            |    -W. Scheider, from a Physics lecture
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 23:10:30 GMT
Organization: MCSNet, Chicago, IL

In article <1993Jan20.154201.21194@crd.ge.com> davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes:
>In article <C14Kvo.18F@ddsw1.mcs.com>, karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
>
>| BTW, the smart shopper considers the value of CPU boards and the like to be
>| near zero the minute you pay the bill.   Same with Operating Systems.  Even
>| SCO has proven this (they wanted twice what Xenix cost for me to upgrade 
>| Xenix to Unix a few years ago, and I could have bought it over from a
>| discount house for the "upgrade" price) 
>
>  And you wind up with a legal copy of Xenix which has some resale
>value.

But today, not much.

>| Therefore, the issue is what you get from the system and OS <now>.  On that
>| basis, SCO loses.  With Sun entering this market, they're going to lose
>| badly.
>
>  Maybe. It depends on the price points. Having Solaris available for PC
>will make a lot of corporate buyers consider PC based UNIX. When then
>see the price of Solaris they might well decide to go with SCO, because
>SCO has spent the bucks gaining name recognition.

No, you're missing the point.  

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.  

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.  

Then there is the application base.  Sparc systems have a reasonably good
one.  PC Unix systems have a horrible one.

>  What would hurt all current vendors is the possibility of cheap V.4.2
>from USL. Imagine $99 runtime, or $200 complete systems, selling in vast
>quantities, pushed by Novell's marketing and name recognition. USL has
>aimed for fairly high income per customer, but under new management a
>mass market UNIX could happen, making profit from volume.

That would be WONDERFUL.  It would also hurt NT <IF> Novell and USL do it
right and put a good GUI-based front end on this thing for installation and
administration.  They would have to make it a "product for the masses", but
this isn't THAT hard to do with the underlying products of today.

>  Of course Novell coulld raise prices and make a great unit profit
>until everyone switches to NT. I admit it, I grabbed a copy of NT for
>$69, because at that price people will try things.

Yep.

--
Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900]

Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: bobd@marune.acs.ohio-state.edu (Bob DeBula)
Subject: ISC v3.0 make hash table overflow making x11r5
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 14:25:07 GMT



I keep running into "hash table overflow" while trying to make
x11r5. I am using GCC 2.3.3 (not that it matters as the same
thing happens with ISC's CC) under ISC v3.0. I am using the
standard ISC make. Does anyone have a hint as to how to deal 
with this? It would seem that the best solution might be
to be able to increase the size of make's has table. Any ideas
on how to do this?

-- 
==========================================================================
              Disclaimer: These are my views, not the U's

        "If it's in the paper it must be true!" --- D. Doright 
Xref: sparky comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:1308 biz.sco.general:5535 comp.unix.sys5.r3:392
From: randy@chinet.chi.il.us (Randy Suess)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Date: 24 Jan 93 23:52:41 GMT
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX

In article <C1DEDz.Mvp@trauma.rn.com> larry@trauma.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>In comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit you write:
>>	and removed /tcb and all the auth nonsense.  I was able to 
>
>what is tcb?
>
	SCO's "security" package.  With 2.0, you can set security
	to standard UNIX (I.E. shadow passwd for all those Cops runners)
	but passwd, login and other stuff still wastes time doing stuff
	with the security database so it is not easy to just edit
	the passwd and shadow file to add/modify users.

>is this an EISA or ISA machine?
>
	klone ISA system.  SCO properly handles above 16 meg memory.

>how many CDROMs do you have mounted at any one time (how many does
>SCO support?).
>
	I have one mounted, but will have 4 and sco supports 7 stock.
	Don't know if they support more.

>Who's CD-Players and disks do you use?
>
	Using an old NEC external.  Wouldn't work with a CHINON, so I
	guess it is kinda picky.

>Are you bringing in the pagesat feed into the SCO machine?  
>Does news just scroll in constantly on the pagesat feed, or does
>it stop/start/stop/start?
>
	Comes is continuous 10k-65k batches.  Second or 2 pause
	every few batches.  I am running a 16 port Digiboard, and
	it handles it just fine.

>I assume your news partion is set at 65k inodes -- or are you
>somehow mounting another machine (or filesystem) to enable the storage
>of more news on-line?
>
	That was the only iffy thing on the change over.  However, ODT2.0
	supports symlinks, so I just put rec and comp in 1 150 meg
	partition and the rest in another and linked them together.

>Is everything placed directly into the in.coming directory? 
>
	Yep.

>Have you done any timing to see exactly how far behind the pagesat
>feed gets during peak distribution times?
>
	I post something to the Internet, I see it from the satellite
	within an hour or 2.  Much better than any uucp feed I have
	ever had.

>-- 
>Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.use.com
>keeper of the Gator                                   uucp: uunet!gator!larry


-- 
	I am created Shiva the Destroyer; Death, the shatterer of worlds!
	Who is this dog meat who stands before me now?
	That's the biz, sweetheart.
Randy Suess					 randy@chinet.chi.il.us
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.sysv386
From: larry@trauma.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Organization: Gator Communications - Feeds-R-Us 219-289-3745 
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:20:16 GMT

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
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch)
Subject: Re: PC Unix/Xenix vendors
Organization: Somewhere just far enough out of Toronto
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 03:35:52 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.203648.28098@sco.com>
	staceyc@sco.COM (Stacey Campbell) writes:

>I have occasionally wondered why public domain or free X servers are
>unported to SCO systems and I suspect the reason is that the stock X11R4
>server that runs under ODT 1.1 (and later versions of ODT) offically
>supports nearly all name brand mass market video hardware as well as
>some the more esoteric high-speed hardware.

All of the R4 vendors also offer fairly well-featured and high-performing
servers too. A big attraction of Xfree86 is its price.  Take a
relatively-unbundled two-user R4 licence (like ESIX or MST), put Xfree86
on it, and you have all the software needed to support a decently
performing PC-based X station for less than $400.

That option (get a two-user licence without GUIs and add the free
server software) just isn't available on SCO. Sure, it doesn't have
everything that ODT has, but the price gap is substantial if you don't
need a Motif desktop or DOS Merge.

>We currently do not support generic ET4000 VGA clones,

If you support stuff like the Boca and Cardinal SVGA cards now, it's as
good as there...

>>Thomas Roell, author of (possibly) the best X server available on
>>Intel UNIX, explicitly prohibits the use of his code on SCO.
>
>Thomas and I have corresponded (via e-mail) for a while now since we both
>at one time or another have been doing similar X server work (for different
>people :-) and I believe that Thomas is more dismayed with some of the
>corporate policies of SCO than with, say, any individual here. :-)

That certainly rings true for me as well. I hold in very high regard the SCO
people I have met with and corresponded with (in person and over the net),
most notably you and Dion. And I have less beef with the SCO product per-se
than I might let on sometimes :-). It is indeed the corporate policies I
usually take issue with as well, whenever I do get negative about SCO.

-- 
 Evan Leibovitch, Sound Software Ltd., located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario
         evan@telly.on.ca / uunet!utzoo!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504
What's with all this multimedia stuff? Most vendors can't get *one* done right.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit