km@mathcs.emory.edu (Ken Mandelberg) (09/22/90)
I'm really disappointed to find that Sun policy on source has apparently
changed with version 2.
First, the release itself has less client source provided with it. For example,
the pageview source no longer comes with the release.
Second, my salesperson tells me that there is no source product for version 2,
at least to universities.
Making xview source public is certainly very postive, but why the mixed
signals?
--
Ken Mandelberg | km@mathcs.emory.edu PREFERRED
Emory University | {rutgers,gatech}!emory!km UUCP
Dept of Math and CS | km@emory.bitnet NON-DOMAIN BITNET
Atlanta, GA 30322 | Phone: (404) 727-7963km@mathcs.emory.edu (Ken Mandelberg) (09/22/90)
I'm really disappointed to find that Sun policy on source has
apparently changed with version 2.
First, the binary release itself has less client source provided with
it. For example, the pageview source no longer comes with the release.
Second, my salesperson tells me that there is no source product for
version 2, at least to universities.
Making xview source public is certainly very postive, but why the mixed
signals?
--
Ken Mandelberg | km@mathcs.emory.edu PREFERRED
Emory University | {rutgers,gatech}!emory!km UUCP
Dept of Math and CS | km@emory.bitnet NON-DOMAIN BITNET
Atlanta, GA 30322 | Phone: (404) 727-7963cflatter@ZIA.AOC.NRAO.EDU (Chris Flatters) (09/23/90)
> First, the binary release itself has less client source provided with > it. For example, the pageview source no longer comes with the release. But the XView 2.0 source release has a lot more than previous releases of XView. In addition to the toolkit source is provided for clock cmdtool/shelltool olwm (OPEN LOOK window manager) props (sets workspace properties) textedit (OPEN LOOK equivalent to xedit) xvbench (looks like some sort of benchmark) perfdemo (enhanced performance meter) xps (PostScript viewer - uses XView/NeWS interface) The source for the examples in Dan Heller's "XView Programming Manual" is also included. The OpenWindows distribution didn't contain much source prior to version 2 either. > Second, my salesperson tells me that there is no source product for > version 2, at least to universities. Not for OpenWindows as a whole. Chris Flatters
km@mathcs.emory.edu (Ken Mandelberg) (09/25/90)
In article <6335@emory.mathcs.emory.edu> km@mathcs.emory.edu (Ken Mandelberg) writes: >I'm really disappointed to find that Sun policy on source has >apparently changed with version 2. > >First, the binary release itself has less client source provided with >it. For example, the pageview source no longer comes with the release. > >Second, my salesperson tells me that there is no source product for >version 2, at least to universities. > >Making xview source public is certainly very postive, but why the mixed >signals? Well, after posting this the other day, I got a very pleasant phone call from Diana Murray at Sun. Diana is currently working on the details of the OWV2 source release, and assures me that the delay between the binary and source release is nothing more than the usual delay at Sun involved in cleaning up the source so that it builds more portably. She is expecting the source to be released in the November time frame. There was even more good news about the pricing. Apparently the source will actually be free to Universities, and low cost to commercial users. The details of what the pre-requisite licensing would be, has not been completely worked out yet. Personally, I'm very pleased with what I heard. Sun source licensing to universities is already very favorable compared with most other vendors, and the even more favorable terms for OWV2 shows some real commitment to the product. Now, if Sun would only do a better job of publicizing what source releases were available or imminent. It seems like getting this info each time is trickier than it needs to be. -- Ken Mandelberg | km@mathcs.emory.edu PREFERRED Emory University | {rutgers,gatech}!emory!km UUCP Dept of Math and CS | km@emory.bitnet NON-DOMAIN BITNET Atlanta, GA 30322 | Phone: (404) 727-7963