HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: scs@lokkur.dexter.mi.us (Steve Simmons)
Subject: Re: No bootlegging hurts Unix
Organization: Inland Sea
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 23:39:32 GMT

dave@rsd.dl.nec.com (Dave Rogers) writes:

>I have worked for numerous companies on a contract basis over the last
>ten years and my experience is that bootlegging of software is at least
>as common in the UNIX world as in the VMS or PC/MAC world.

Agreed.

>As a matter
>of fact I have not yet worked for any company that has not *knowingly*,
>illegally used software.  This is fundamentally a management issue.

Agree with the second sentence but not the first.  There *are* honest
companies in this world.  In my standard terms and conditions for
consulting the following words appear:

	 Inland Sea is not a vendor of licensed software.  It is
     the  clients  responsibility  to provide all needed licenses
     for operating systems, systems software products,  3rd-party
     software, etc.

	 Inland  Sea will not install any software without proof
     of license.

The second paragraph is in italics.  Never once has a client objected
to it; only once have I needed to point it out.  More than one client
has said that they like the statement -- it means I'm probably honest.
-- 
When Dexter's on the Internet, can Hell be far behind?
Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:2038 comp.unix.sysv386:8590
From: bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Date: 13 Apr 92 18:04:22 GMT
Organization: Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden

In article <id.UBTO.FSJ@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <1992Apr8.063828.20163@lth.se> bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson) writes:
>> It may be relevant if the current SCO UNIX is not specially targeted for
>> single-user systems. I haven't used it so I don't know. 
>
>That's the whole point of the distinctions between "SCO UNIX" and "SCO Open
>Desktop". ODT is a single-user version.

All right. But I suppose the software is sold the same way to both?

>> >of product for PCs. It's twice the price for Microsoft Word for the
>> >Macintosh. And where are the $18, $56, and $37 products?
>
>> The market is much smaller.
>
>And why is that? Let's get to the point...

Please state your point then.

>> Besides, those using Turbo Pascal or the equivalent may disagree.
>  [ about the quality of UNIX tools ]
>
>I've used Turbo Pascal. UNIX is a *way* better development environment.
>A UNIX program is *way* easier to implement than a DOS version, let alone
>a Mac one. For one thing, you don't have to rewrite the operating system.

Lots of religious statements.
-- 
Bengt Larsson - bengtl@maths.lth.se
From: etxkrjg@solsta.ericsson.se (Kristian Jorg  TX/DKL)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: rcs -- Help wanted !!
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:51:03 GMT
Organization: Ericsson

sop@cci.dk (S|ren Overgaard Petersen) writes:


>Could anyone out there give me a pointer to where I can get hold of
>the rcs (revision control system) software?

>Is it public domain or how?
>Is there a ftp site to get it from?

It is not really public domain. It is free software under the GPL licence
that all the FSF (GNU) products obey. Rcs is a part of the FSF products.

You could get it from prep.ai.mit.edu, or any other ftp site mirroring
the GNU stuff.

Good luck!



--
-----------------------------------+  
Kristian Jorg                      !  
e-mail: etxkrjg@solsta.ericsson.se ! 
-----------------------------------+
Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:1987 comp.unix.sysv386:8317
From: bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Date: 8 Apr 92 06:38:28 GMT
Organization: Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden

In article <id.VWLO.MOE@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <1992Apr02.072043.12182@Celestial.COM> bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) writes:
>> Not to quibble, but the Amiga, Mac, and IBM prices are for single
>> user progams.  The SCO Single-User price for MS-Word is $495, and
>> multi-user is $1,495 so you're ahead with UNIX on 4 or more
>> users.
>
>This may be true, but it's not relevent. The subject line has wandered some,
>but this whole thread started with a discussion of Univel's "Unix Lite"
>product, and what it would need to be to successfully compete for the
>single-user desktop market with Macs and DOS boxes. So the fact that you
>can get a multiuser license for Word is irrelevent.

It may be relevant if the current SCO UNIX is not specially targeted for
single-user systems. I haven't used it so I don't know. 

>But even with that, your price for a single data point, MS Word for SCO
>in a single-user configuration, is still $200-$350 over the same class
>of product for PCs. It's twice the price for Microsoft Word for the
>Macintosh. And where are the $18, $56, and $37 products?

The market is much smaller.

>UNIX Lite needs to cost no more than DOS or Windows, and it can't be
>saddled with gold-plated software prices. I mean, UNIX is a *way* better
>development environemnt than MacOS or DOS... so why do the products
>cost more?

Because the market is much smaller and the smaller market is fragmented.

Besides, those using Turbo Pascal or the equivalent may disagree.

Bengt Larsson.
-- 
Bengt Larsson - bengtl@maths.lth.se
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.sys.sun.misc
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: No bootlegging hurts Unix
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 19:37:47 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.141903.3507@sci34hub.sci.com> gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston) writes:
> Agreed. I think most software is overpriced, though, so if I can't
> afford it, I don't have it. I can't justify $500 for a C compiler
> to play with at home.

So use a cheaper one at home. I don't know about your PC, but for the Amiga
you have the choice of PDC, DICE, GCC, and Lattice 3.3.

The problem with UNIX is these cheaper products don't seem to exist.
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
8 T(Ferranti International Controls Corporation)24 28 S(+1 713 274 5180)24 12 S
(Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012)24 20 S 12 /Courier F(`-_-')320 32 S( 'U` )320 16 S
12 T(Peter da Silva)24 36 S 16 T(Have you hugged your wolf today?)358 24 S
From: pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: No bootlegging hurts Unix
Date: 7 Apr 92 04:30:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: bradley.1992Apr7.043021.29411
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bradley University

And God help you if you try to run several different packages,
each with it's own special licensing scheme, which is impossible
to keep seperated from the others.

Not to mention trying to explain to a faculty member, unused to such
considerations, why s/he can run one package freely, but not the other
unless they spend another $1500 to upgrade the license....
-- 
Pete Hartman		       Bradley University	pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
     Buy you books, and buy you books, and all you do is eat the covers...
From: hroth@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Harris Roth)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: IPC configuration
Date: 9 Apr 92 18:13:05 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

How are the system level configuration parameters for Interprocess Message
queues changed?  I know that parameters for specific queues can be changed
but I'm interested in parameters like:

>total number of queues permitted in the system
>maximum size of a message queue
>maximum size of a message on a message queue

Is there a standard UNIX include file for the kernel build
and/or does the system administrator use something like sysadmin?  Your
help either by post or E-mail to point me in the right direction is 
appreciated in advance.

Regards,

Harris 
-- 
Harris J. Roth, Senior Programmer Analyst |
System Software                           |   hroth@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM 
Transaction Terminals Systems Division    |
NCR E&M Atlanta                           |
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: roycel@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Royce Lithgo)
Subject: Where can I get zoo v2.1 for Unix?
Reply-To: roycel@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 11:34:42 GMT

Sorry if this is the wrong news group, but I didn't know which one to
post to.  If you don't know, could you please point me to the right
group to post to.

Thanks.
From: holsberg@pilot.njin.net (Peter J. Holsberg)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: TCF'92 THIS WEEKEND!
Date: 6 Apr 92 18:14:24 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


The Trenton Computer Festival 1992 will be held at Mercer College on
Saturday, April 11 (9-6) and Sunday, April 12 (10-4). 

This year's festival features:
	- The world's largest outdoor personal computer FLEA MARKET
	- Over 170 National Vendor and Commercial Booths, featuring AST,
          Adobe, Aldus, Borland, Microsoft, Lotus, Corel, Micrografx,
	  Toshiba, Hewlett-Packard, WordPerfect, Intel, Symantec, 
	  Software Publishing, and local vendors.
	- More than 125 FREE Seminars, Forums and Talks on all aspects of
	  computing.
	- Thousands of dollars worth of door prizes, including an AST 386SX
	  notebook computer, an HP color printer and an HP color scanner.
	- Saturday evening banquet features keynote speaker, Paul Grayson,
	  CEO of Micrografx. Tickets are $20 each.
	- Admission:
		General: $7 for both days; $5 for Sunday only
		Students and Seniors: $3 for both days
		Preschoolers accompanied by adult: FREE
		Other Children Under 12 accompanied by adult: $3 for both days,
			FREE on Sunday only

Files with all kinds of good information are available for anonymous
ftp from pilot.njin.net (128.6.7.38) in pub/TCF/tcf.  They include:

	what.is.TCF - history and description of TCF
	gen.info - general info about TCF, directions, parking, etc.

Pete Holsberg
TCF 92 Steering Committee
From: techs@triton.unm.edu (Erik Fichtner)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: "Open Systems"
Date: 9 Apr 92 19:34:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: lynx.-=sjwfg
Organization: The Middle Of Nowhere, Inc.

In article <1992Apr8.231518.13501@cirrus.com> dhesi@cirrus.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
>In <ku6mpuINNm80@alhena.usc.edu> ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes:
>
>>DOS is not Unix.
>
>UNIX is a DOS, however.
But unix is much much more than that..  drop the D. Unix is an operating system.
it operates the COMPUTER.   DOS is a a disk OS. It controls the disks, pretty
well, but it does a poor job of running the computer.

its another case of anything that includes the words "Operating System" in it's
name, isn't.   just like this new "OPEN systems" term..  bah.


-- 
Techs		techs@triton.unm.edu 
Disclaimer: any inaccuracies are caused by the phase of the moon
"...whaddya mean I ain't kind... Just not *your* kind!" - Megadeth
From: mtpins@icaen.uiowa.edu (Michael T Pins)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: Where can I get zoo v2.1 for Unix?
Date: 14 Apr 92 16:47:35 GMT

roycel@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Royce Lithgo) writes:

>Sorry if this is the wrong news group, but I didn't know which one to
>post to.  If you don't know, could you please point me to the right
>group to post to.

grind.isca.uiowa.edu
It in the unix/arc-progs directory.


-- 
*****************************************************************************
* Michael Pins                |   Internet: amigapd@isca.uiowa.edu          *
* ISCA's Amiga Librarian      |         #include <std.disclaimer>           *
*****************************************************************************
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 13:47:25 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.081309.28990@leland.Stanford.EDU> fangchin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Chin Fang) writes:
> If you have a large enough disk, have ported g++, and am willing to read
> a few READMEs and do a little text editing using whetever, why don't you
> guys ftp interviews.stanford.edu and build the InterViews tool kit and
> these fairly neafty clients like

> The *WORD PROCESSOR (WYSWYG)* doc
> The MacPaint like             idraw

> Cost to people having access to Internet:  $0!
> Cost to people without access to Internet: beats me :-> 

I have access to the internet. But it's not gonna be free... I'm going
to have to fork out several hundred dollars minimum for a new motherboard
to fit X-windows into memory, probably need to replace one of my disks
to get enough space to install GCC, G++, X11 (probably need R5, right?),
and then Interviews itself. Plus several weeks hack time. And when I'm
done I won't be able to run it from the living room... I'll have to be
sitting at the console.

Oh well, now you've sent me a pointer I'll look into putting it on the
Sparcs here at work.
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
8 T(Ferranti International Controls Corporation)24 28 S(+1 713 274 5180)24 12 S
(Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012)24 20 S 12 /Courier F(`-_-')320 32 S( 'U` )320 16 S
12 T(Peter da Silva)24 36 S 16 T(Have you hugged your wolf today?)358 24 S
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
From: karln%karln.UUCP@uunet.uu.net (Karl Nicholas)
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Organization: Security Pacific
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 16:39:53 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.154603.4277@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us> mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) writes:
>In article <ADAMS.92Apr6022007@PDV2.pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de> adams@pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de (Adams) writes:
>>On Internet, waiting to be repacked and distributed ;->. No joke, even
>>in Germany we have shops specialized to get Internet sources,
>>compile(!) them, provide "install shells" and (re)distribute them ;->.
>
>I just got a flyer from a place called "Ready-to-Run Software", which
>has precompiled versions of most of the common free software
>available.  They sell software in "paks" -- i.e., DeskPak, with things
>like Emacs, TeX, groff, etc. in it; FunPak, with games; etc.  Each
>"pak" runs between $150 and $275; for an additional $150/pak, they'll
>send you the source for the software in a pak.  (I don't know how this
>jives with the GNU GPL that a great deal of their software is covered
>by.  Is $150 a "nominal charge for the cost of distribution"?)  They
>offer binaries for SCO Unix machines, SPARCs, Sun 3s, and DECstations.
>

  No way.  I've got a CD here with EVERYTHING on it.
All the gnu source, gcc, g++, gnuchess, everything. Also compiled for
a sparc. A Working copy of emacs (for the SPARC)
Also has X11R5 source and also compiled for a SPARC. You got it
folks, the whole thing. More source than you can shake a stick at.

  $40  - yes thats only $40. Got two CD's as well, as the first one was
deemed "Not so good", though I havn't figured out why yet.

Jointly produced by Sun User group ( 617 232-0514)
                  and PDG Software ( 510 947-5996)

I doubt if these people will have it all compiled for a i386
system, but still, you were talking about big bucks for source
that can be had for $40 a CD!!

******************** FLAME ON **************************
the X11R5 as it comes compiled for the SPARC did not work!
PDQ Software took my name a number an disapeared when I asked
them about it. The Xaw library was compiled to libXaw.so.5.0, 
but ld.so kept looking for libXaw.so.4.0. I having figured
out a way around this, except to put the X11R4 libs in the LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
******************** FLAME OFF ****************************
-- 
***************************************************************************
| Karl Nicholas                 | A million monkeys in a million years    |
| karln%karln.UUCP@uunet.uu.net | did write Shakespeare, we evolved ...   |
***************************************************************************
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH)
Subject: Re: "Open Systems"
Reply-To: allbery@ncoast.org (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH)
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 20:22:30 GMT
Followup-To: comp.unix.misc

As quoted from <ku6mpuINNm80@alhena.usc.edu> by ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah):
+---------------
| means something.  A system is Unix if and only if it will compile and
| run everything on prep.ai.mit.edu without restrictions.  So: No, VMS
| is not Unix.  DOS is not Unix.  Windoze NT is not Unix.  No matter
| what the MBAs say.
+---------------

This comes very close to an attempt to claim that System V R3 is not Unix.  A
common ploy on the part of another type of bigot:  the BSD bigot.

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery, KF8NH [44.70.4.88]        allbery@NCoast.ORG
Senior Programmer, Telotech, Inc. (if I may call myself that...)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Any comments on `Unix-Lite'?
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 21:40:47 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.155921.22198@lth.se> bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson) writes:
> My background is VAX/VMS. And from that viewpoint, security as
> *implemented* in common Unixes leaves much to be desired. Examples are
> "." in roots path, "+" delivered in hosts.equiv, pty:s that can be
> defeated, NFS that can be spoofed, etc. 

That's all true for BSD based systems. None of those particular problems
exist in System V (not that there aren't some... but then there are problems
in VMS as well... the method of specifying files outside your cluster
is really dangerous, for example: embedding a password *in* the filename?
Give me a break!), and I dare say there are more System V systems out there
than BSD ones.
-- 
-- Peter da Silva,  Ferranti International Controls Corporation
-- Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012;  +1 713 274 5180
-- "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith)
Subject: pc unix (was Re: whining about ...)
Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 02:39:41 GMT

In article <1992Apr4.103232.1770@ukpoit.co.uk> ian@ukpoit.co.uk (Ian Spare) writes:
>Many organisations are moving to Unix to replace existing mid-range or
>main-frame environments and require single systems supporting 100, 200 or more
>users, one would hardly expect PC-UNIX to be the platform of choice for these
>systems.

Hmm, let's look at that again.  4 years ago I could buy a 386/20 capable
of supporting about 16 users with 'pc unix' (Xenix, and I installed it
myself all the way from putting the box together, to the cables, to the
software and menu's and such, and it still runs like a champ)

Last month we switched from an AS/400 to an EISA based SCO 486/33 single
CPU setup and have >30 users and a half dozen dial-in lines, a couple of
high speed printers ....  Runs like a champ.

In four more years we'll probably be able to support >200 users on some
sort of commodity equipment without any problem.  So this would lend me
to think:

If I need 200 users ON ONE BOX, TODAY, I'll have to buy some sort of
monster machine. 

If I could network 3-5 smaller 'pc unix'boxes I can get the same user
base on commodity hardware, and if my application / office needs are
expanding every year, the commodity equipment may keep the pace or even
outdistance my office needs over the next for years.

So, If I had an office today needing 20-40 users, I'd put in a single
486/33 type box and next year when I need 40-80 users I can plug in the
586/60 motherboard w/ 128MB of RAM and 1M Cache and keep right on
trucking without dropping a stitch ...

>
>Its certainly true that SCO in particular have sold huge quantities of their
>UNIX ( and previously Xenix ) but it's not clear to me that this market is 
>sustainable, surely it will sustain most of the attack from NT ?? I would
>think the long term viability of PC-UNIX is very suspect. 
>
>I would agree with much of what you say if the 'pc unix' simply read 'Unix'.

What's probably gonna happen is that NT is gonna HELP unix.  It will
look like unix, run like unix, taste like unix, and we'll end up with
another unix-like operating system to work off of, that might have some
application bleed over...

PeeCee's just aren't PeeCee's anymore.
-- 
Keith Smith          uunet!ksmith!keith            5719 Archer Rd.
Digital Designs      BBS 1-919-423-4216            Hope Mills, NC 28348-2201
Somewhere in the Styx of North Carolina ...
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: eigenstr@nyssa.cs.rose-hulman.edu (Todd R. Eigenschink)
Subject: NeXT WP grips (was Really Misleading Subject)
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
	<ae4Ht_ek6@cs.psu.edu> <id.I3RO.I0L@ferranti.com>
	<1992Apr12.180723.4076@news.rn.com>
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 18:44:37 GMT

In article <1992Apr12.180723.4076@news.rn.com> larry@news.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>
>>> Word Perfect and WriteNow are
>>> decent word processors for the Unix based NeXT computer.
>
>>They ought to be. They cost enough.
>
>wait a minute -- Word Perfect for UNIX isn't much more than WP for
>DOS --  
>
>-- 
>=*= Larry Snyder, Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-0777 - 10 lines =*=
>internet: larry@gator.rn.com        uucp: uunet!trauma!larry

WordPerfect for the NeXT ISN'T, as far as I'm concerned.  Not only is
it monolithic and severely lacking in funcionality (why didn't they
port 5.1 instead of whatever they _did_ port?????), it's
SSSSSLLLLLOOOOOWWWWW!  Nothing like a 64040 box that runs WP slower
than a 8088 runs just about anything...

And WriteNow...please.  NeXT doesn't even support it anymore.  Doesn't
that tell you something?  It was/is consistent, at least--it'll crash
about every 10 minutes for me.

...and who said that the NeXT was Unix-based?  Nonononono...it runs
Mach...and Mach most definitely is NOT Unix.

(Conversation overheard between two profs, one from our school and one
from a different one:

Theirs: What do you teach your introductory courses with?
Ours: Pascal on the NeXT.
Theirs: NeXT...is that Unix?
Ours: No...it's Mach.
)

The same prof also claims (and many students agree with him) that we
have only 4 types of machines on campus:

1. A VAX running VMS and various other kinds of DEC hardware.  This
   needs no further description, does it? :-)
2. Toasters.  One lab full of Zenith 386 PeeCee's.  It's unfortunate
   that they even have to get ranked with actual computers, but...
3. Pseudo-toasters.  Somewhere in the neighborhood of 350 NeXT
   machines.  They're considered to have infested our otherwise pleasant
   campus.
4. Real computers.  A still-growing lab of Sun hardware.  Perhaps this
   classification was a bit biased, since he's a CS prof and this lab is
   run by the comp. sci. dept, but still...


Oh, yeah...and this week's issue of the school paper had a cartoon
showing a NeXT with an airbag popping out of the monitor.  The caption
said "Some said the NeXT's 'crash protection' went a bit too far."  I
wonder if one of those things would survive a drop from the top of
Moench hall?  (heh heh heh :)

--
Todd Eigenschink (eigenstr@CS.Rose-Hulman.Edu)
Assistant System Manager, News Administrator
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, Terre Haute, IN
"G++ is to C++ as Turbo Pascal is to Pascal--it's a great compiler,
 but for a language other than C++."  -- Fred Sullivan
Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:2021 comp.unix.sysv386:8552
From: larry@news.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Date: 12 Apr 92 18:07:23 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Feeds-R-Us

peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

>> Word Perfect and WriteNow are
>> decent word processors for the Unix based NeXT computer.

>They ought to be. They cost enough.

wait a minute -- Word Perfect for UNIX isn't much more than WP for
DOS --  

-- 
 =*= Larry Snyder, Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-0777 - 10 lines =*=
      internet: larry@gator.rn.com        uucp: uunet!trauma!larry