From: marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.sys.novell
Subject: Re: Novell to buy USL !?
Date: 30 Dec 1992 03:05:58 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Department MSCS
NNTP-Posting-Host: studsys.mscs.mu.edu

In article <C01Czy.685@iphase.com> grima@iphase.com (Gary Rima) writes:
>In article <1992Dec29.033023.20700@sci34hub.sci.com> gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston) writes:
>>In article <brian.83.0@SJF.Novell.COM> brian@SJF.Novell.COM (Brian Meek) writes:
>>>There's been a lot of negative reaction to this news and I certainly don't 
>>>wish to fan the flames...  I understand where many of the concerns are 
>>>coming from, but I would like to see a bit less public speculation (based 
>>>primarily on emotions) and a bit more openness.  After all, isn't UNIX 
>>>typically associated with "open systems"?  
>>Yes. Novell isn't, which is one of the things that concerns me a lot.
>Well, I've watched this thread passively 'till now, but just can't let that go
>unchallenged.  IMHO, Novell is associated with "open systems".  Witness on one

And I have too..... and now I'm going to put in my $0.02.

>hand the support of TCP/IP within NetWare 3.11 and the support for NetWare
>services under UNIX, on the other hand Novell's willingness to provide source
>licenses for their own SPX/IPX as well as the core NetWare services.

No need for the source licencing on spx/ipx, as I understand Novell has
released some specs to the PD.  I also agree with the gent from Comm Week
who said this is a harrbringer to the spx/ipx going away.

>I'm afraid you're making the old mistake of assuming that "open" and
>"proprietary" are opposites - they're not!  "Open" and "closed" are opposites

My fear is that Unix licences won't be as wide-spread.  So there won't be
multiple vendors for a '386 world.  I'll be REALLY worried if the Novellians
come forth with an Apple-sh proclimation:  "We are comitted to high profit
for our stockholders"

Novell would show it's "openness" by letting BSDI do it's thing.  Let the
markets decide.

>and look for a moment.  In terms of total number of attached nodes worldwide I
>believe you'll find Novell's IPX is the dominant protocol - bigger than TCP/IP.

Your point?  
Or are you holding up a 'market forces' arguemnt?  If that's the case,
why are there many TCP/IP offerings for the DOS world?
Shouldn't they be happy enuf with the 'dominate protocal' spx/ipx?

>In spite of this Novell does offer full support for TCP/IP and NFS - even though
>it's an option.  Generic UNIX, OTOH, doesn't provide direct support for NCP and
>SPX/IPX.  It was left to Novell to provide both of these services for UNIX
>platforms.  Now, who's more "open"????

Until recently, IPX/SPX specs weren't released to the 'public domain'  
To use it, you had to PAY novell.  I'd wager the bet the DEMAND wasn't
there, for whatever price Novell was charging.

>>the context) to make sure it doesn't cut into the sales of that grossly
>>overpriced cash cow called NetWare, then it will have been cut down, and
>>a large forest of users/licensees will be wiped out.
>Ah, so if Novell takes UNIX and adds integral support for NetWare protocols
>and services, thereby making it more "open" you now choose to refer to that as
>"hacked up".

No, I think it's the rumor I've heard.  Goes like this.  A Novell promo
about how 'wonderful' this new Unix offering is going to be.  Simplifyed.
All those commands no one uses will be gone.  Like sed, awk, grep.
Perhaps 'hacked up' isn't a good word....how bout busted.

>>>On one hand, Novell has made real efforts to adopt and *promote* more 
>>>"traditional" UNIX networking technologies based upon TCP/IP standards 
>>twice the price again! (100 user 3.11 lists for $6995, 3.11 NFS for $3995,
>>and Dell SysVr4 for $1600, last I heard.)

Gary, now tell the REST of the story.....how much for the dos end
clients that give equivalent funtionality to a novell connection?  If 
you know of some PD/low cost solutions, let me know, ok?
Otherwise, Novell wins, cuz you don't spend 'per seat' like the Unix
solution.  (PC-NFS)

>Yeah, and a Sun Sparcstation 10 is incredibly more expensive than a 386 PC.

Yeah, so?  I can put a Unix sun box on my desk for LESS than a '486 with
unix AND the sun will be faster.  (or anly of the low end unix workstations.)
The sparc 10 has just a BIT more power.  Please do as you say and.....
>Let's compare apples to apples, please.  

>I'd be really interested to see the
>Dell box running SVR4 trying to adequately service 100 clients, vs. the same
>box running NetWare 3.11.  

Shall we pick a database service?  What's the criteria?  Files?  
I know a site that uses PCI interface and has 80 dos users, and seem MORE
than happy.  That's the closest to your specs.  
I'm sure the Unix box would do a better job then, say a centurian computer.

>C'mon, Gary, do you really believe that if NetWare
>was as wildly overpriced for its functionality as you claim, that Novell would
>not be only still alive, but prospering and growing??  I really choose to give

Ahhhh the old market forces argument.  Fine, how's this one:
MS-DOS MUST be better than Unix, otherwise why would there be 
so many copies sold?

>Finally, for conversation's sake, I'd suggest that if UNIX had been strongly
>promoted and market by someone *like* Novell a few years ago, maybe we'd have
>_one_ version of UNIX right now, instead of the several incompatible versions
>that currently exist; and maybe we'd all be working with UNIX instead of

One version of Unix may have helped.  But so would the Bill Gates
tactic of $8 OEM cost of DOS 5.0 and Workgroups for Windows.  Cheap gets 
'em in.  It's done it for DOS.  The free Unix end of things would address
this end of the business.

My view on the whole thing:
1 - Unix is destine to be data-base servers etc.  Novell doesn't have 
a product that does a good enuf job.  They do now.  (assuming the buy goes thru)
2 - Novell has some money.  Rather then 'invest' it in, say, land or
pork bellies, they are doing the best thing they can with it....investing it
in themselves in the form of buying out a piece of pie they don't have.
3 - Novell wants to be the Micro$oft alternative.  (Is this a 
profitable thing to be?  Don't know)


>Centurion N7358E					grima@iphase.com
Centurion?  As in the 'national chain' of computers?  

-- 
Marc Rassbach    marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu    If you take my advice, that
MS-DOS - it's not   marc@milestn.mil.wi.us    is your problem, not mine!
my problem!     If it was said on UseNet, it must be true.
   Unix - It's a nice place to live, but you don't want to visit there.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc