uhclem@trsvax.UUCP (12/31/87)
<> >/* ---------- "2nd to last posting on Microsoft dr" ---------- */ >I've entitled this the "second to last" posting as I don't intend to >continue discussing it further here. My last posting will be to extend my >congratulations when a real guarantee on XENIX binary compatibility >has been offered. Until then, I have nothing further to add. However I would >like to redirect the discussions dealing with Microport to where they would be >most welcome, and serve some real use; namely Microport's BBS. This is now >open to everyone, not just Microport customers. An announcement about it and >our BIX conferencing has been posted to comp.unix.microport. ...more blah blah omitted >I've waited patiently these past couple weeks for an official response to my >previous points. But there's been nothing. The closest comments came from two >Microsoft employees, and neither made clear their authority to act as >an official spokesperson. Nor was a program guaranteeing XENIX binary >compatibility offered. ...considerable blah blah omitted > -dwight- > > Dwight H. Leu ihnp4!amdcad!uport!dwight > V.P. Engineering well!wolf > Microport microsoft!sco!ucscc!uport!dwight > 408-438-8649 bix: dleu >These statements expressed are of course my own viewpoint. God, you sound like 'Drew' of DAK. "I've challenged Escort to a one on one performance test and they just ignored me!" Now, I don't think that is quite the case here. I think that the reason that you were not able to draw "anyone with authority" out of Microsoft to make a statement on the network is that they have a situation there as we have here: The management "with authority" does not read news/notes, and/or does not consider them to be the valuable method of communicating with customers that it can be. Also, the wording of any "official" statement could be changed accidentally or intentionally by any site upstream of you or in transmission and that text could come back to haunt various lawyers. Subsequently, the engineering staffs cannot talk about new products, company strategy, and sometimes current company positions. When we post a bug fix, we have to disavow the companies commitment to support that fix. Some companies do not even allow this. (Based on 5 years of watching the net, I suspect that Microsoft falls in this category as I have seen them sit by when they could have issued a very short patch to resolve some crisis being bounced around the net.) Most engineers just stick to rec.* groups or some group that does not deal with their companies activity. As an example, I released a product in April and it is just starting to show activity on the net. But for months we had to listen to people flame us and try to draw us out on what the future holds. Now we can talk about it to some extent, but only in present tense. No future directions. If you really wanted to exude a promise or committment from Microsoft, I suggest that they be sent a letter ON PAPER. U.S. MAIL. Also, it should be sent by a registered owner of the product in question. If you haven't bought a single copy of Microsoft XENIX, then why should they bother with you? Politeness might get you some response, but after the accusations and fog you have generated, I don't think they would answer your letter even if you were registered. Perhaps one of your staff who has a copy of XENIX registered to their name (probably a firing offense, but overlook it this time) should write a letter expressing his/her concerns about the ability for existing software she/he owns being usable in future releases of Microsofts multiuser product, whether it will be called XENIX, UNIX or XUNIX. (No, I didn't make the last one up.) ^---(pronounced Zoo-Nix) Might try that, and who knows, perhaps you can get further than Drew did. But then, I think Escort probably had the better product anyway. <Obviously my opinion or that of my Golden Retriever, who hates Letni boxes and does offensive things on them every chance he gets.> "Thank you, Uh Clem." Frank Durda IV @ <trsvax!uhclem> ...decvax!microsoft!trsvax!uhclem ...convex!infoswx!hal6000!trsvax!uhclem <Now don't give the 80386 multiply instruction too many numbers or it'll get hot and make mistakes.> "Oh Intel, thank you sooo much! In building the 80386, you finally gave us a machine that did not require segments anymore! And instead of giving us a few more general purpose or scratch registers, you gave us.... TWO MORE SEGMENT REGISTERS!!! ON A MACHINE THAT DOESN'T NEED THEM!!!! ARGGGGHHH!!!!!"