tim@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Timothy L. Kay) (04/17/89)
In article <15741@clover.ICO.ISC.COM> rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn) writes: >> > And the FSF doesn't have that kind of money to spend, and thier >> >goal is to build a Unix system that is totally free of any AT&T code, >Well, speaking as someone who owns a 286 machine and an older release of [...] >So the reason I won't send all that money to OSF is that it won't give me a ^^^ Arggggggh! The OSF is not the FSF!!! OSF = Open Software Foundation FSF = Free Software Foundation The OSF is a collaboration of companies such as IBM, Apollo (now HP), etc., whose goal is to come up with a competing (with AT&T/Sun) standard Un*x-like product. They are basing their code on IBM AIX which is itself based on the AT&T code. The FSF is Richard Stallman's group, who are providing GNU Emacs, GNU gcc, etc. for *free*. They are also planning GNU, the Un*x-like kernel that will be *free*, involving no AT&T code. Tim
tvf@cci632.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) (04/17/89)
In article <15741@clover.ICO.ISC.COM> rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn) writes: >In <98683@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>, plocher%sally@Sun.COM (John Plocher) writes: >[various interesting comments about final technical status of Microport >stuff] > >> > And the FSF doesn't have that kind of money to spend, and thier >> >goal is to build a Unix system that is totally free of any AT&T code, >> Instead of everyone spending thousands on yet another Unix Company, why >> not send that money to the Free Software Foundation so that someday soon >> we ALL can have a Unix-Like OS? ... deleted stuff ... >In spite of the "software for the people" approach (of the FSF) >they aren't interested in any machines that don't have 32-bit >integers and pointers, and a whole bunch of memory. The FSF people are one group. I haven't heard anyone talk about taking MINIX ($80 gets you the source to everything) and using that as a base for a 286 product? I know, it doesn't have the 286 protected mode stuff built in, but there are people who have worked on that problem. ast has made statements that he isn't going to make a SVID-compliant OS, but his plans are to make Version 2.0 POSIX compliant. Yet Another Solution: - Microport Kernel (buggy or bug-free as it may be) - PD/FSF/Whatever Drivers (modified for V/AT) - PD/FSF/MINIX/MKS Tools (Yeah, you'd still have to buy MINIX) (KSH, AWK, BISON, SED, TAR, etc.) Neither is a perfect solution, but as time goes buy I'm more convinced us buying Microport is not a good idea (see previous postings for the why's). Thomas V. Frauenhofer ...!rutgers!rochester!cci632!ccird7!tvf *or* ...!rochester!cci632!ccird7!frau!tvf *or* ...!rochester!rit!anna!ma!tvf1477 FRAU BBS: (716) 227-8094 2400/1200/300 baud - log in as "new" to register
jeffrey@algor2.UUCP (Jeffrey Kegler) (04/18/89)
In article <27949@cci632.UUCP> tvf@ccird7.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) writes: >... but as time goes buy I'm more convinced us buying >Microport is not a good idea (see previous postings for the why's). Let me repeat some of the why's. Those of us reading this news group are hackers to one degree or another. In buying Uport we would waste a lot of time dealing with MBA's who, not knowing the business, would run a lot of dumb bluffs on us, and probably screw up the deal. Even if it works we are stuck with the AT&T license. Much better to spend your time and money with GNU and the FSF. The tendency of something free to get around is almost irresistible. UNIX when it started was free. MS/DOS was essentially free since it got bundled into the machine (the 386 I am writing this one comes with MS/DOS whether I use it--I don't-- or not, so the marginal cost to me == marginal utility == zero). And everything written based on GNU is "marked" with the GNU "freeright". How often have you seen a wonderful package tainted by one piece of proprietary something it was written on, for or with. GNU will use the same mechanism to make large amounts of other stuff free. (Computer Maker wants to move metal, likes free OS, and is hooked.) This Uport business is an excellent example of how wasteful proprietary OS'es are. Only Uport staff could look at the code. But they were overworked, so fixes and improvements were slow. Meanwhile, customers who could have done the fixes or improvements were banned from seeing the code. This stifles cash flow and makes Uport staffing tight. Mind you, I have nothing against greed so long as it does not interfere with business. You 286 users have three choices: MINIX, which is not free but pretty close, SCO, which is far from free but well-supported, and upgrading to 386's which is what I just did. I think if you look at the price difference versus the time and trouble it takes to run UNIX on a 286, you may find the switch justified. Even those who do not (I was a college student once, too) are going eventually see 386 prices come so close to 286 prices, that you too will upgrade. So the 286 UNIX market is a disappearing entity. not sure it is worth arguing -- Jeffrey Kegler, President, Algorists, jeffrey@algor2.UU.NET or uunet!algor2!jeffrey 1762 Wainwright DR, Reston VA 22090