kabra437@pallas.athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) (03/14/90)
I intend to send this message as mail and also post it to the xenix news group in hopes that it will spark some additional discussion. First I think it is imperative that we precisely define "support" for the context of this discussion so we can know exactly what SCO has in mind. If we are talking about upgrades and enhancements as support, then I have absolutely no problem with a decision by SCO to drop this kind of support. If, on the other hand, we are talking about bug fixes and "customer" support (ie user has a place to call with questions) then I do NOT think it is proper for SCO to stop this kind of support on such a short time frame as is proposed (1991). I think this might fall in the category of a consumer rights issue. In the last 10 years or so, regulations have been enacted that requires a company to provide service and parts for major consumer purchases for some minimum period (assuming the company doesn't go out of business). This applies to cars and major appliances and the like. How would you feel if you paid $15,000 for a car and found out when the car is 2 years old that the manufacturer decided to stop making spare parts for it because the profit margin wasn't high enough? I think we can draw some parallels in this discussion although I doubt that any of these statutes have been successfully applied to computer software but maybe it should. (I am NOT a lawyer). I have had one personal experience along these lines. One year after I bought my first PC, the company dropped support of it COMPLETELY so they could concentrate on newer models (more $$$). I can guarantee you that I will NEVER do business with these folks again either on a personal basis or through my employer. Next lets talk briefly about costs to "upgrade" to UNIX. The initial cost of the operating system software is only the tip of the iceberg. In order to get a true picture of the total costs involved in this kind of a change, one must add in the time involved to do the load, the time and money required to adapt all the other software, the cost of re-training all the administrators and users and the cost of lost production time while all this takes place. In a fairly large operation, I can envision these costs amounting to 10X the cost of the opsys itself. Now we are talking about costs in the range of $ 15,000 instead of the original $ 1,500 we are asked to shell out for UNIX. In addition to all these costs, there is the general hassle of changing out a stable environment for something that is unknown. I'm sure that there will be cases where the conversion will be VERY long and expensive and messy. Given this possibility, I think the consumer should be allowed to make this decision freely without any subversive pressure from SCO to make a change that he really doesn't need (in a lot of cases). Another user suggested that if you're unhappy "Just say NO to SCO UNIX" and I agree totally (if they drop support entirely for any of the XENIX products). Unfortunately, this still leaves us with a nasty choice to make; stick with an unsupported product or go through the hassle of buying someone else's UNIX. I don't like either choice. I have been paying my annual Softcare fee even though I have called SCO only twice since my initial "warranty" period expired. If they continue to offer this service I will keep up my "subscription". If, on the other hand, they do discontinue support for my Xenix 386, I don't really know what I will do but I AM sure that SCO will NOT be included in the solution. That's my 2 cents worth. I do think that someone at SCO owes us a better definition of what they mean when they say that they "might drop support for Xenix 386 sometime after 1991" (may not be an exact quote). -- ======================================================== Ken Abrams uunet!pallas!kabra437 Illinois Bell kabra437@athenanet.com Springfield (voice) 217-753-7965
jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (03/16/90)
In article <309@pallas.athenanet.com> kabra437@pallas.UUCP (Ken Abrams) writes: >First I think it is imperative that we precisely define "support" >for the context of this discussion so we can know exactly what SCO >has in mind. If we are talking about upgrades and enhancements as >support, then I have absolutely no problem with a decision by SCO >to drop this kind of support. If, on the other hand, we are talking >about bug fixes and "customer" support (ie user has a place to call >with questions) then I do NOT think it is proper for SCO to stop this >kind of support on such a short time frame as is proposed (1991). XENIX is very old and exists in a market which pretends to be heading towards increased standardization. [ Which is why the OSF exists - to insure Yet Another Standard is created ... ] Letting XENIX die really makes sense. It isn't USG and it is BSD. It's this strange middle of the road creature which refuses to behave like what we'd expect a "UNIX" thingy to behave like. SCO's decision to stop support in one or two years is no less arbitrary than their decision to stop support in three or four years. It would, IMHO, be best to take my licks up front, rather than investing years of effort in an operating system I wasn't sure would be supported in three more years. >That's my 2 cents worth. I do think that someone at SCO owes us a >better definition of what they mean when they say that they >"might drop support for Xenix 386 sometime after 1991" (may not be an >exact quote). They do pay attention to this newsgroup. You will probably receive at least e-mail from someone there, plus a free subscription to whatever developer mailing list they have ... -- John F. Haugh II UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832 Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
mark@promark.UUCP (Mark J. DeFilippis) (03/20/90)
In article <18150@rpp386.cactus.org>, jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes: > XENIX is very old and exists in a market which pretends to be heading > towards increased standardization. [ Which is why the OSF exists - > to insure Yet Another Standard is created ... ] Letting XENIX die > really makes sense. It isn't USG and it is BSD. It's this strange > middle of the road creature which refuses to behave like what we'd > expect a "UNIX" thingy to behave like. I just wanted to point out something here. I think the fact that it was a middle of the road thingy was a plus. The fact that it kind of came from version 7, but sometimes behaved like USG, had some BSD but not all, and resembled SYSV.2 somewhat, has a cross of SYSV.3 in it, and is a subset of SYSV.4 kept all of us who have to work with it on our toes. Porting a piece of code for XENIX was like porting to all those, since after the port to XENIX the port to anything else was simpler being that you just partially ported to it through the XENIX port. I have always thought of it as a blessing. If I only got to work in BSD4.X, I think I would become partial and lazy, not to mention lose some skills. With all the complaints I see about SCO's product cost, I think we should keep in mind the levels of support they provide, the range and magnitude of support. Let us not forget how many of the updates were FREE to ALL levels of customers. Heck, I wish the upgrade to UNIX was cheaper, but that is the least of my problems. My problem is getting the drivers for the tape unit, computone boards, etc. So... Anyone know if drivers are available for SCO Unix for the Computone Intelliport and advantage boards? Arnet boards? Yes, I could call the company, but I thought I would cram all my thoughts into one message. Also since I was aware that the Microport UNIX was cheaper then SCO XENIX, why did the company have the problems thay had? Anyone know what the disposition of that company was/is? If someone knows what the problem was, the story so to speak, and it has not been rehashed 1x10^9 times here when I was not paying attention, I would like to hear it... -- Mark J. DeFilippis SA @ Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Adelphi University, Garden City, NY 11530 (516) 663-1170 UUCP: philabs!sbcs!bnlux0!adelphi!markd
chris@choreo.COM.COM (Chris Hare / System Manager) (03/20/90)
Regarding this whole issue of support from SCO.....
Choreo Systems is VAR for SCo, and other products. We provide among other
things Authorized SCO Training to our customers and the general public, as
well as support services.
While I agree that it is unfortunate that SCO has decided that they will
drop support for XENIX eventually, it is not a new opinion. It was
mentioned at SCO Forum89 that XENIX development, and fixes will slow down,
as it is essentially a stable product.
This serves a couple of purposes:
1. It allows SCO to concentrate on this new beast called UNIX 3.2 which
doesw require a lot of manpower to port everything they have from XENIX
to UNIX. (All of the UNIX utilities in UNIX 3.2 do not use termcap,
they use terminfo; including vi.)
2. It allows vendors, VARS, distributors, etc, who have the capabiltiy
of providing support to the end-users to take this business.
SCO has also said that they will be leaning on their sales channels to
provide different levels of support, as they want to do less and less with
the end user.
End users who call SCO for product sales have their personal info gathered,
and then that info is forwarded to the appropirate sales force.
Don't get me wrong, I do not work for SCO, or speak for them in any way.
I teach SCO classes as an authorized instructor and it is often a hot topic
of debate over a lunch, however, what often comes out of the debate is that
the people who are arguing for XENIX will eventually switch or be switched
to SCO UNIX.
------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Hare, Co-ordinator, Systems Management *** IT WORKS FOR ME! ***
Authorized SCO Instructor
Choreo Systems Inc. 500-150 Laurier Ave W.
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5J4
E-MAIL ...!choreo!chris Voice (613) 238-1050
Fax (613) 238-4453davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (03/22/90)
In article <36@choreo.COM> chris@choreo.COM.COM (Chris Hare / System Manager) writes: | I teach SCO classes as an authorized instructor and it is often a hot topic | of debate over a lunch, however, what often comes out of the debate is that | the people who are arguing for XENIX will eventually switch or be switched | to SCO UNIX. Perhaps. Certainly if SCO stops selling Xenix (not just supporting) then they will switch. However, although some will switch to SCO UNIX, some will evaluate other vendors and switch. We are currently looking at UNIX vendors for just this reason (no NFS for Xenix), and the only place SCO currently wins cleanly is the compilers, and that only if you need or want cross compile. They win on security for the kernel. Price is very strange, clearly if you have more than one system ESIX wins that. Make your own choice on system reliability, but even SCO people at UNIX-Expo said that Xenix was a more stable product. In short, there was only one Xenix vendor, there are many UNIX vendors, who offer price, performance, or stability advantages to some customers. It is not clear to me that your comment about moving to SCO UNIX is completely true. Another vendor told me that "Xenix customers are up for grabs." That's probably somewhat true. SCO obviously feels that they will gain more customers calling the product UNIX then they lose by dropping their Xenix customers. Open Desktop is another interesting product, since most of it comes from other vendors, and it's likely that SCO makes a lot less profit on ODT than a comparable UNIX system. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc "Getting old is bad, but it beats the hell out of the alternative" -anon
chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) (03/23/90)
According to davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen): > In short, there was only one Xenix vendor, there are many UNIX >vendors, who offer price, performance, or stability advantages to some >customers. [...] Another vendor told me that "Xenix customers >are up for grabs." That's probably somewhat true. That's true of the Xenix users I know, and it's true of me too. Why should I buy Unix from SCO? Xenix is mature and stable. SCO Unix is brand new. Other than the far-too-much-security of SCO Unix, it offers nothing I can't get for less money elsewhere. -- Chip Salzenberg at ComDev/TCT <chip%tct@ateng.com>, <uunet!ateng!tct!chip> "The Usenet, in a very real sense, does not exist."
jeff@hobbes.C2S.MN.ORG (Jeff Holmes) (03/26/90)
In article <2609352D.C52@tct.uucp> chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) writes: > According to davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen): > > In short, there was only one Xenix vendor, there are many UNIX > >vendors, who offer price, performance, or stability advantages to some > > That's true of the Xenix users I know, and it's true of me too. Why > should I buy Unix from SCO? Xenix is mature and stable. SCO Unix is > brand new. Other than the far-too-much-security of SCO Unix, it > offers nothing I can't get for less money elsewhere. On this note, do any of the other Unix'es offer source level debuggers? One of the main reasons SCO Unix is attractive to me is Codeview. If I can somehow get GDB running it won't be an issue, but I don't know the chances of that yet. Some have said, "good luck". -- Jeff Jeff Holmes DOMAIN: jeff@questar.mn.org Questar Data Systems UUCP: amdahl!bungia!questar!jeff St. Paul, MN 55121 AT&T: +1 612 688 0089
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (03/26/90)
In article <5377@questar.QUESTAR.MN.ORG> jeff@hobbes.QUESTAR.MN.ORG (Jeff Holmes) writes: | On this note, do any of the other Unix'es offer source | level debuggers? One of the main reasons SCO Unix is | attractive to me is Codeview. If I can somehow get | GDB running it won't be an issue, but I don't know | the chances of that yet. Some have said, "good luck". WHo cares? The development set and the o/s are not restricted to work only with each other. I'm told by two people that the SCO UNIX dev. set works just fine under ix386. That gives you Codeview and cross compilation, too. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
lws@comm.wang.com (Lyle Seaman) (03/27/90)
jeff@hobbes.C2S.MN.ORG (Jeff Holmes) writes: > On this note, do any of the other Unix'es offer source > level debuggers? One of the main reasons SCO Unix is > attractive to me is Codeview. If I can somehow get > GDB running it won't be an issue, but I don't know > the chances of that yet. Some have said, "good luck". Huh? sdb _is_ a source level debugger. Works great if you use an xterm window with scrollbars. -- Lyle Wang lws@comm.wang.com 508 967 2322 Lowell, MA, USA uunet!comm.wang.com!lws
jpr@dasys1.uucp (Jean-Pierre Radley) (03/27/90)
In article <309@pallas.athenanet.com> kabra437@pallas.UUCP (Ken Abrams) writes: >I intend to send this message as mail and also post it to the xenix news >group in hopes that it will spark some additional discussion. My newfeed has been a bit erratic, so if the following 10k bytes have already appeared in this group, my apologies. This came from a posting to the TANGENT LIBrary of Compuserve: ------------------- Due to the recent and lively postings regarding SCO upgrade policies, we at SCO would like to provide a clear statement of the facts and rationale behind our policies. WARNING: The following contains explicit and unexpurgated commercial content. Hit 'N' now if you wish to forego this sort of information. BACKGROUND: WHY WE MOVED FROM SCO XENIX TO SCO UNIX SYSTEM V SCO XENIX has been a tremendously successful product, and it is well known for its features and capabilities. It is based on earlier UNIX System V source baselines, and its low memory requirements and mature robustness have contributed to its ongoing popularity. In mid-1989, SCO introduced a new operating system based on AT&T's UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2. For the first time, AT&T allowed other vendors to license the UNIX System trademark. In order to avoid the historical confusion about whether SCO XENIX was really a bonafide UNIX System, SCO decided to license the UNIX trademark and comply with AT&T's strict conformance guidelines and rename our product line SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2. SCO UNIX System V is a larger and more powerful version of the UNIX System than previous releases. For example, it is more easily extended to support networking and distributed file systems because it was designed with features such as Streams and File System Switch. To the AT&T baseline, SCO added features designed to meet the FIPS-POSIX and X/Open Portability Guide requirements, as well as the U.S. Government Department of Defense National Computer Security Center (NCSC) Trusted Computer Systems Evaluation Criteria at the C2 level. SCO UNIX System V also includes a fast file system (AFS) and provides the basis for SCO's Open Desktop workstation product. Based on the advanced architectural features of this release, SCO has created additional optional products such as SCO MP/X (multiprocessor extensions) and SCO NFS (distributed filesystem). However, we still offer some optional products--such as SCO TCP/IP, SCO VP/ix, and SCO Xsight--that run on both SCO XENIX and SCO UNIX System V environments. SCO UNIX System V Release 3.2 has been well received and accepted because it provides excellent upward compatibility for running both 286 and 386 XENIX applications. It also offers much better system administration and documentation, as well as all of the value-added features that have made SCO XENIX System V such a success. We appreciate that some SCO XENIX users are reluctant to switch because SCO UNIX System V is still in its first release. They feel that SCO UNIX System V has not yet gained the maturity that comes from dozens of releases based on feedback from hundreds of thousands of actual field users. It's true that because of its more modular architecture and enhanced functionality, the UNIX System requires more memory and disk space than XENIX, and it takes a larger hardware configuration to provide the same performance. In addition, SCO XENIX device drivers will not run on the UNIX System without at least a recompilation, and it takes time before all of the add-on hardware vendors can provide new versions of their drivers. Because of these concerns, we have assured our customers that we will continue to support the SCO XENIX product line as long as significant demand continues. In fact, since the release of SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2, we have continuously issued bug fixes and support supplements to SCO XENIX System V in response to user feedback. If necessary, we will roll these changes into new versions of the product from time to time. We will also make updates to these new versions available to existing customers. Many of these updates and bug fixes are available to anyone over our BBS, via anonymous uucp. For a copy of downloading instructions, simply mail support@sco.com. SCO has also targeted the first customer shipment of SCO XENIX System V Development System Release 2.3.1 for March 16. This release incorporates all of SCO Support's level 1 and level 2 bugs, as well as all development-system bug-fix disks circulating with other retail products. It also includes significant enhancements to the C compiler. SCO UPGRADE POLICIES SCO is committed to providing our customers with a smooth upgrade path so that they can keep pace with our current product offerings. At this point, SCO has committed to actively support SCO XENIX 386 until at least the end of 1991, and we will support SCO XENIX 286 indefinitely. Furthermore, we will extend our support beyond those dates if customer demand warrants it. Meanwhile the bulk of our resources are devoted to making SCO UNIX System V and related optional products the most advanced and powerful version of the UNIX System available. We have also based our new Open Desktop product line on SCO UNIX System V. Open Desktop includes a complete version of the SCO UNIX System, along with fully integrated TCP/IP, NFS, X Window System, OSF Motif, DOS emulator and distributed SQL database. A major new release, SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2 Version 2, will incorporate all of the current bug fixes that were created in response to actual customer use of the product, as well as significant performance improvements and support for additional devices, such as CD-ROMS, more tape drives, disks, printers, etc. In addition, Version 2 will provide more flexibility in configuring the enhanced security features to meet customer needs--for example, developers who do not require extensive multiuser security features, and BBS sites who wish to implement their own security features. Other improvements included in Version 2 will be a full Job Control Korn Shell and tools to ease the conversion from the SCO XENIX to SCO UNIX System V. In addition, Version 2 will include features added for Open Desktop that better support a networked, X-Window environment, such as support for LAN Manager networks and X/Open-conformant ISAM. SCO encourages current SCO XENIX users to consider upgrading to SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2 when Version 2 becomes available in June. We have attempted to make the upgrade from SCO XENIX to SCO UNIX System V as painless as possible. Unfortunately, this upgrade requires a complete new set of floppies and manuals, as well as a new AT&T UNIX System license. This upgrade is available in a convenient prepaid mailer through all SCO dealers and distributors or directly from SCO if you are an SCO SoftCare or SCO SoftTech customer or a member of our certified SCO Developer Program. (The SCO Developer Program is for hardware and software vendors who are creating products to operate on the SCO platforms.) If you wish, you may subscribe to our SCO SoftCare or SCO SoftTech support service or join our developer program prior to ordering the upgrade, if you meet the qualifications. The same prices and prepaid mailer can be used to upgrade either the operating system or the development system. Prices also vary according to the release from which you are upgrading. A list of the recommended prices for this upgrade follows. The upgrade will be to whatever version of SCO UNIX System V Release 3.2 is currently shipping. An update from Version 1 to Version 2 of SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2 will also be available at a very attractive price. PRICES FOR UPGRADING TO SCO UNIX SYSTEM V This table shows the prices of upgrades from the following operating systems (unlimited user configuration) to the current version of SCO UNIX System V, according to the class of SCO-supported customers. Somewhat lower upgrade prices apply to 2-user systems. Upgrade prices -----> Sugg.list SCO SoftCare SCO SoftTech SCO Developer from: XENIX 386 2.3 $495 425 375 350 XENIX 386 2.2 or older $550 450 400 350 XENIX 286 (any, or another $595 500 450 350 commercial UNIX system) In addition, SCO offers an upgrade on the same basis from SCO XENIX or SCO UNIX Systems directly to the full Open Desktop system. The prices for this upgrade follow: PRICES FOR UPGRADING TO SCO'S OPEN DESKTOP This table shows the prices for upgrades from the following operating systems to the current release of Open Desktop (workstation runtime configuration), according to the class of SCO-supported customers. Upgrade prices -----> SCO SoftCare SCO SoftTech SCO Developer from: SCO UNIX $575 450 350 SCO XENIX (any version) $625 500 400 Any other commercial 450 UNIX Operating System The Open Desktop Server Upgrade and Development System are available now through a special pre-release program. When these components are ready for customer ship, comparable upgrade prices will be established. OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER All prices and policies are subject to change without notice. The prices and conditions stated here reflect our policy in the U.S. and Canada as of today. Because our distribution channels vary considerably in other parts of the world, different programs exist in other countries. Please contact your local distributor for applicable local programs. Products purchased under the developer program may not be resold. SEND MAIL, WE'RE LISTENING If you have comments, questions or concerns about this policy, please send mail to info@sco.com. If you have questions or wish more information on the SCO Developer Program or developer prices, please email your postal mail address to devrel@sco.com. If there are issues of general interest, SCO will post a follow-up to this message. We appreciate your frank and helpful discussions, and will continue to utilize this news group as one of our most important sources of customer feedback. Thank you. SCO Sales, SCO Developer Relations, SCO Support, and SCO Marketing, 400 Encinal St. Santa Cruz, CA 95061 Bangpath: ...{decvax!microsof, ucbvax!ucscc, sun, uunet}!sco!info Domain style: info@sco.com FAX: 408-458-4227 Telephone: 408-425-7222 --- QM v1.00 * Origin: Unix [219-287-9020 289-3745 289-0286] larry@nstar (1:227/100.0) ........ -- Jean-Pierre Radley jpr@jpradley.uucp New York, NY 72160.1341@compuserve.com
neal@mnopltd.UUCP (03/28/90)
->
->jeff@hobbes.C2S.MN.ORG (Jeff Holmes) writes:
->> On this note, do any of the other Unix'es offer source
->> level debuggers? One of the main reasons SCO Unix is
->> attractive to me is Codeview. If I can somehow get
->> GDB running it won't be an issue, but I don't know
->> the chances of that yet. Some have said, "good luck".
->
->Huh? sdb _is_ a source level debugger. Works great if you use
->an xterm window with scrollbars.
->
I think he meant to say a <working> debugger...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neal Rhodes MNOP Ltd (404)- 972-5430
President Lilburn (atlanta) GA 30247 Fax: 978-4741
uunet!emory!jdyx!mnopltd!neal Or uunet!gatech!stiatl!mnopltd!neal
------------------------------------------------------------------------------