bhoughto@hopi.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) (12/13/90)
Clear something up for me: how long does DEC plan to support/upgrade Ultrix? Will they need to do so once they have a POSIX-compliant VMS? Will they want to? --Blair "Questions, questions, questions..."
avolio@decuac.DEC.COM (Frederick M. Avolio) (12/14/90)
ULTRIX, as we have stated, is moving to an OSF/1 base. Digital's UNIX engineering is growing and continuing to move forward. A POSIX-compliant VMS is something very important to Digital and should be important to our VMS customers. It furthers VMS's support of standards. It has nothing to do, however, with Digital's UNIX engineering effort. Digital's plans for ULTRIX certainly are very long-range. Fred Manager, Washington ULTRIX Resource Center
bhoughto@hopi.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) (12/14/90)
In article <1990Dec13.163211@decuac.DEC.COM> avolio@decuac.DEC.COM (Frederick M. Avolio) writes: >ULTRIX, as we have stated, is moving to an OSF/1 base. Digital's What sort of source-code availability will there be? Will it do to get it from OSF? --Blair "...pardon my mangling the syntax of my native tongue..."
mjr@hussar.dco.dec.com (Marcus J. Ranum) (12/14/90)
In article <1357@inews.intel.com> bhoughto@hopi.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) writes: >Clear something up for me: how long does DEC plan to >support/upgrade Ultrix? Will they need to do so once >they have a POSIX-compliant VMS? Will they want to? Considering that we're selling lots of machines that VMS won't run on, we'd be awfully dumb to dump ULTRIX. I assume your posting must be a joke - the amount of resources DEC has invested in the UNIX marketplace should tell even the most cynical how serious DEC has gotten about UNIX/ULTRIX/OSF-1. mjr. -- How can something called "UNIX(Tm)" be "open"? [From the programming notebooks of a heretic, 1990]
bhoughto@pima.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) (12/15/90)
In article <1990Dec14.033930.2797@decuac.dec.com> mjr@hussar.dco.dec.com (Marcus J. Ranum) writes: > Considering that we're selling lots of machines that VMS won't >run on, we'd be awfully dumb to dump ULTRIX. I assume your posting must >be a joke - the amount of resources DEC has invested in the UNIX >marketplace should tell even the most cynical how serious DEC has >gotten about UNIX/ULTRIX/OSF-1. The folk-wisdom, however, has always held that DEC didn't _want_ to produce a Unix-alike so much as it _had_ to in order to keep from losing out on the major portion of the OS marketplace to the point of losing VAX business with recently-won customers. I'm glad you've gotten serious about it, and if OSF-1 is the F-15[**] everyone claims it is, life should get nice. --Blair "'The folk-wisdom...' Sheesh." [**] The F-15 was designed to fill a specific gap (remember the FoxBat?), but has been 'ported' to capabilities nobody ever thought one design could manage. The folk-wisdom there is that it's never failed to do something someone asked it to do, and almost always greatly exceeded the requirements.
pavlov@canisius.UUCP (Greg Pavlov) (12/15/90)
In article <1357@inews.intel.com>, bhoughto@hopi.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) writes: > Clear something up for me: how long does DEC plan to > support/upgrade Ultrix? Will they need to do so once > they have a POSIX-compliant VMS? Will they want to? > ... for as long as they decide to sell to customers who are looking for better price/performance than systems based on VAX and 80n86 processors provide.... pavlov@stewart.fstrf.org