plb@dcdwest.UUCP (Phil Blais) (02/02/90)
In article <90@moxie.UUCP>, greg@moxie.UUCP (Greg Hackney) writes: > In article <90012712325770@masnet.uucp> mark.levy@canremote.uucp (MARK LEVY) writes: > > > to the best of my knowledge, SCO is the only company > > that ever sold a PC version [of UNIX], with the exception of XINU and MINIX, > > i.e I believe that it is the only commercial version. > > I saw Venturcom's "Venix" on an XT. Xenix was much better. We USED Venturcom's "Venix" on many XT's. At the time it was like a cool ocean breeze in the middle of a barren DOS desert. Today SCO Xenix is our OS of choice.
rogerk@sco.COM (Roger Knopf 5502) (02/02/90)
>> I don't mean to scare you, but I'd recomend 2MB for starters, and then at >> least an additional 1MB per user... Dave is right on the money. SCO Xenix-86 never supported more than 640Kb. Roger Knopf SCO Consulting Services
mark.levy@canremote.uucp (MARK LEVY) (02/04/90)
wu> I am thinking about running a unix operating system on my IBM PC wu>XT clone (8 mhz.) and I was told xenix was a good operating system. wu>Could anyone please tell me some things about xenix? wu> 1) How close is xenix to true unix? XENIX is Microsoft's licenced version of UNIX, based on Unix version 6. It has since been heavily modified by Santa Cruz Operation (SCO). It is a fully functional version of UNIX, even in the PC-XT version, although it will be far more limited and slow than the 386 or even 286 versions. to the best of my knowledge, SCO is the only company that ever sold a PC version, with the exception of XINU and MINIX, i.e I believe that it is the only commercial version. I don't believe that SCO has updated it for some time, so although it should be available from somewhere, it probably won't be UNIX SYS V compatable. wu> 2) Does it have uucp with the ability to send mail and read wu>news? It does have the standard mail and UUCP functions. I don't know if the news (USENET) software has been ported to it by SCO. SCO does offer binaries, but I don't know what processor they are compiled for. wu> 3) Is it multi-user/multi-processing? YES wu> 4) How many terminals can you attach and what type (i.e. wu> VT100, ADM3A, etc.) ? Unknown, but realisticly, don't expect to get more than 3-5 users on a 10MHz XT. It would use the standard termcap, so most terminals should be covered, and you would have the ability to add terminals to the database. The key is to get as much memory as you can possibly afford. You want to avoid swapping processes at all costs, since you will get old waiting on an 8 bit controller to swap a big file. I don't mean to scare you, but I'd recomend 2MB for starters, and then at least an additional 1MB per user. Realizing that you'll probably be using 41256-120s, that won't be too expensive, at about $76.00 MB. wu> 5) What is the price range?? Unknown, but I'd be suprised if it were more than about $350.00 wu>P.S. 6) Does it have its own C compiler???? Unknown, but I doubt it. Well, maybe... Mark --- ~ DeLuxe 1.11a18 #3019 ~ QNet 2.04a:NorthAmeriNet: Sound Advice BBS ~ Gladstone ~ MO
ronald@robobar.co.uk (Ronald S H Khoo) (02/05/90)
In article <90020407120043@masnet.uucp> mark.levy@canremote.uucp (MARK LEVY) writes: > It does have the standard mail and UUCP functions. I don't know if > the news (USENET) software has been ported to it by SCO. SCO does > offer binaries, but I don't know what processor they are compiled > for. 286, I'm afraid. For one thing, getting compress to work in 64k would be *interesting* to say the least. I used SCO B News binaries for quite a while. Works. -- Eunet: Ronald.Khoo@robobar.Co.Uk Phone: +44 1 991 1142 Fax: +44 1 998 8343 Paper: Robobar Ltd. 22 Wadsworth Road, Perivale, Middx., UB6 7JD ENGLAND. $Header: /usr/ronald/.signature,v 1.2 90/01/26 15:17:15 ronald Exp $ :-)
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (02/06/90)
In article <90020407120043@masnet.uucp> mark.levy@canremote.uucp (MARK LEVY) writes: | to the best of my knowledge, SCO is the only company | that ever sold a PC version, with the exception of XINU and MINIX, i.e | I believe that it is the only commercial version. IBM sold PC/ix, an INteractive port of SysIII, for some time. We still have machines running it, because it is dead reliable and there's no good reason to change. I agree that Xenix is the way to go. -- bill davidsen - sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX davidsen@sixhub.uucp ...!uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen "Getting old is bad, but it beats the hell out of the alternative" -anon
mark.levy@canremote.uucp (MARK LEVY) (02/06/90)
In article <90012700003218@masnet.uucp> mark.levy@canremote.uucp (MARK LEVY) writes: I don't mean to scare you, but I'd recomend 2MB for starters, and then at least an additional 1MB per user... cm>My understanding is that an XT can only handle 10 bits of address. cm>Therefore, it is probably a waste of money to put more than 1MB on cm>it... I meant in regards to the 286 or 386 versions of XENIX. Sorry for any confusion I may have caused. Mark --- ~ DeLuxe 1z11a18 #3019 PANIC! iinit. System Halted ~ QNet 2.04a:NorthAmeriNet: Sound Advice BBS ~ Gladstone ~ MO
stevesc@microsoft.UUCP (Steve SCHONBERGER) (02/10/90)
I looked. List price for 8086 (8088) Xenix is $295.
macy@fmsystm.UUCP (Macy Hallock) (03/04/90)
Recently someone asked for a copy of SCO Xenix Development system
for the 8088/86. I looked, and I have an older copy sitting around
doing nothing...but one of the disks seems to be missing...otherwise
it is complete with the manuals. This is a legitmate, albeit older
package.
If you want, drop me a line. We are talking very cheap here...make
me a offer...
Macy M. Hallock, Jr. macy@NCoast.ORG uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy
F M Systems, Inc. {uunet!backbone}!cwjcc.cwru.edu!ncoast!fmsystm!macy
150 Highland Drive Voice: +1 216 723-3000 Ext 251 Fax: +1 216 723-3223
Medina, Ohio 44256 USA Cleveland:273-3000 Akron:239-4994 (Dial 251 at tone)
(Please note that our system name is "fmsystm" with no "e", .NOT. "fmsystem")