From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: SysV
Summary: I'll comment here :-)
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 19:35:35 GMT
Organization: Macro Computer Solutions, Inc., Chicago, IL

In article <1992Sep26.165358.16305@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> dwex@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (david.e.wexelblat) writes:
>In article <Bv6txK.GGz@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>> jack@admin.mport.COM (Jack Craig) writes:
>> 
>> >microport is also an 'excellent port' but i dont feel i can promote it
>> >is this forum without(rightful) flaming.
>> 
>> Microport, ah -- I remember them -- they've have money problems
>> for quite some time, eh?  Chapter 11 was it?  Actually, they product
>> last time I checked with all the options was about twice as much
>> as Dell.
>> 
>> >svr4 offerings from del esix, uhc, consensus, and microport all
>> >bear consideration for issues of price, performance, and support.
>> 
>> But to date, Dell offers the most stable, solid and bug free
>> product on the market.  
>
>Larry, will you shut up already?  How many of the current SVR4.0.4 products
>have you actually tested, and compared to one another?  How do you know
>that Dell's current offering is any more stable than 4.0.4 from Microport
>or Esix?  And, from the comments recently, it seems that the 2.2 release
>from Dell is LESS stable than the 2.1 release.  I haven't seen that kind
>of bug report about Microport or Esix' 4.0.4.

Well, you know, I also run Dell 2.2 (4.0.4 in USL parlance)

Uname -a says:

ddsw1 ddsw1 4.0 4.0 i386 i386

I have had >none< of the problems that I've seen reported here.  I have seen
a couple of problems with the shipped NNTP software -- easily remedied with
the "real" NNTP (Dell's included version is 1.5.10; 1.5.11 has a number of
bug fixes).

My uptime seems to be limited only by whim (mine) and the electric company
(power).  I've had no "events" since installing the product.  Performance is
excellent.  Reliability is excellent.  The "bundled approach" is to be
>COMMENDED< - not condemned - in my opinion.

This I cannot say about >any<, and I repeat - ANY - other versions of
Unix on ISA machines.  I've run a number of them -- and I push 'em all hard.
Every one has blown chunks under the kind of load I place on them - until now.

I have no intention of buying Microport.  Microport earned my hatred a number
of years ago with both their '286 and early '386 releases of 3.2.  
Unfortunately that poisoned my opinion - but it happened.  The Microport of
today doesn't seem interested in redressing these old wounds, preferring
instead to try to sell to a new customer base.  So be it.  I have no
complaint with marketing decisions, but to this day I will recommend against
their products because I was left out in the cold, and that shows a
corporate attitude that could turn against me and my customers again.  Once
burned, shame on you.  Twice burned, shame on me.

ESIX could get my attention -- if they choose to.  I have no opinion on them
either as a package or as a company -- no experience with either.

SCO earned my hatred three years ago when they tried to charge me more than
my Xenix release cost to "upgrade" to SCO Unix 3.2.  Then they made sure I'd 
be upset when they then turned around and shipped a product that broke my 
major revenue package at the time (AKCS) due to their proprietary "security"
extensions.  Compatibility with industry standards?  SCO "enhanced" them out
of existance with their TCB; that's enough for me to stay away.

ISC hasn't had a truly stable network release yet.  I gave up after 2.2;
they had three tries to make this work, and three strikes and you're out.
They're now owned by SunSoft -- and they no longer have a SVR4 until 
Solaris 2.0 ships (which, from the Sun users reports I've heard, has its 
own share of serious stability and operability problems).

>Until you have sat down and done an actuall side-by-side comparison of
>the products, you are in no position to make such statements.  If you
>base such statements on how many complaints there are on netnews, Dell's
>2.2 is beginning to look like Consensys.

Bull David.  What I've seen is one particularly vocal person complaining
about serial interface problems.  Funny that I haven't seen any.  Funny 
that not many others have reported this either.

DELLs network support is some of the best out there.  They are extremely
stable in TCP/IP service, which is a sore spot with Intel-based releases.
Few seem to take the idea of Ethernet seriously.  Dell definately does.
That, IMNSHO, is a BIG essential.  Their basic OS release is >extremely<
stable with the 2.2 issue.  2.1 and prior DID have some serious stability
problems.  I'd like to think that my reporting of exact and excruciating
details helped them to fix some of these.  Regardless, they >did< get fixed.

>I'm glad your system works fine.  Bully for you.  But not everyone has
>the same purchase criteria, or the same hardware as you do.  Posting
>hundreds of lines of marketing info that no one asked for is uncouth.

Point made David.  But my experience has nothing to do with marketing info,
it has to do with who has the best bang for the buck.

--
Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sys5.r4