[comp.unix.microport] Unbundling - we all do it, so let's stop complaining

plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) (07/28/88)

> > [re: Bell Tech]
> > You don't get Nroff, or Troff, no online man pages either.
> Hold on, there - the nroff/troff support disappeared from *ALL* releases
> of System V beginning with System V Release 2.0 in 1984, because of the
> availability "as an add-on" of the new "device-independent troff." It was
> easier to support (and more profitable to sell separately) this way.

Let's all remember:

 o  AT&T unbundles the base system, DWB, Software development (SDS),
    and network extensions (NSE).
 o  Microport unbundles the base system, DWB, SDS, and NSE.
 o  Bell Tech unbundles the license, the media, and the manuals; does not
    provide DWB.

Since we all do it, all this "advertising" is just that.  We 
unbundle Unix in an attempt to provide our customers with what they need
without forcing them to buy things that they don't.  Each of us has a
different idea of how best to do this.

Being blunt, AT&T unbundles things because it can make more money by licensing
it that way.  Microport uses the same divisions because it makes paying
fees to AT&T easier.  Bell Tech sells Unix (with their drivers) at almost
their cost because they hope to sell you their hardware and make up for the
low price that way.


***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***
*** Warning, The following material may be hazardous to those who       ***
***          strongly dislike anything that even smells like marketing. ***
***          Press 'n' now if you fit this description                  ***
***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***   ***


So why is Bell Tech such a hero for selling a *complete* Unix?

	Bell Tech			Microport (list price)
	AT&T Vr3.0    			AT&T Vr3.0 v3.0

	 	    +- AT&T License -\
	 $145	    |-   Runtime    -/      $299 (includes Media + Manuals)
		    |-   SoftDev    --      $549
		    +-   STREAMS    --      $199
	not included     DWB 2.0    --      $199
	 $ 45	    --    Media           included
	 $125       --   Manuals          included
        ========		         ==========
         $315	                           $1246 if purchased seperately,
				           $1098 if bundled

What does the extra $783 get you from Microport?

  o  Easy installation via an automatic, interactive install procedure
  o  DWB 2.0 (nroff, troff, otroff, -mm, -man ...)
  o  Green Hills C/386
  o  System Vision - a fully menu driven System Administration program
  o  Korn Shell - both vi and emacs editing modes
  o  adb & kernel debuggers
  o  Virtual consoles (and with an EGA, virtual graphics screens)
  o  Serial ports that work without having to buy Bell Tech's HUB or ICC card
  o  Off the shelf support for almost ANY "dumb" multiport serial card
  o  Drivers available for Arnet, Computone/Intellicom, Comtrol Systems,
     Digiboard, Stargate, and Wyse's "smart" multiport cards
  o  Support for non-standard (ST-506 interface) MFM, ESDI, and RLL drives
  o  Support for SCSI disk and tape drives
  o  Tape backup that works with standard Everex or Wangtek 60 & 125 Mb tape
     drives (not just Bell Tech's own - ask them, their driver is designed
     to only work with their drives)
  o  A 30 day Installation Support and Money Back warranty - if it doesn't
     work for any reason, send it back for a refund
  o  A BBS (UA) which has bug fixes, new programs, access to tech support,
     & uucp/netnews interfaces. (408) 438-1680 [1200] & 438-6567 [trailblazer]
  o  Me :-)


  -John Plocher
   Customer Support Manager

pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) (07/29/88)

In article <382@uport.UUCP> plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:
...	Bell Tech			Microport (list price)
...	AT&T Vr3.0    			AT&T Vr3.0 v3.0
...
Is v3.0 released?  How does a 2,2 owner get an upgrade?

...What does the extra $783 get you from Microport?
...
...  o  Me :-)
...
...
...  -John Plocher
...   Customer Support Manager


OK - so where's the answer to my oft-repeated questions about "assign"
and the LogiTech mouse, already?

dar@belltec.UUCP (Dimitri Rotow) (07/30/88)

WARNING!  What follows contains sales and marketing talk!


In article <382@uport.UUCP>, plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:
> > > [re: Bell Tech]

[ John writes a lot of stuff comparing what you *do* get with Microport to
what you *don't* get with Bell Tech.  For starters this is dumb because we
simply publish the operating system that Intel and AT&T create.  It's not 
a "Bell Tech" anything, it's an Intel/AT&T product.  That there happen to
be "Bell Tech" device drivers in it (along with Interactive Systems device
drivers, Intel device drivers and AT&T device drivers) is because *Intel* 
and *AT&T* put them there when they certified *their* product.  We don't
add *anything* to the already hot Intel/AT&T product.  If you don't think
Intel and AT&T are real serious about shipping a "shrink-wrapped" O/S
product, you should re-read Intel's recent ads in UNIX/WORLD and elsewhere.

Anyway, John says some stuff about the Intel/AT&T product that just isn't
so ... here are only the points that need correcting... Keep in mind that
when he says "Bell Tech" he's really talking about the Intel/AT&T release.]

>  o  Bell Tech unbundles the license, the media, and the manuals; does not
>     provide DWB.

Wrong.  We sell it for $45.

> fees to AT&T easier.  Bell Tech sells Unix (with their drivers) at almost
> their cost because they hope to sell you their hardware and make up for the
> low price that way.

Wrong.  We sell UNIX cheap for the same reason we helped Microport get started.
We think a solid, non-proprietarized UNIX sponsored by Intel and AT&T which is
sold for the same price as DOS helps everyone in the UNIX market (except maybe
those companies that have an ax to grind keeping it proprietarized and over-
priced).  We make a lot more money from software value added than hardware.

> [ John does a comparison that shows you spend $783 more for Microport than you
would with Bell Tech, and then goes into a list of stuff that Microport has 
and Bell Tech allegedly doesn't have ...]
...
> 
> What does the extra $783 get you from Microport?
> 
>   o  Easy installation via an automatic, interactive install procedure

Wrong.  We've had this in every release Intel's given us.

>   o  DWB 2.0 (nroff, troff, otroff, -mm, -man ...)

****** Buy it for $45 if you're too cheap to get Elan's neat-o product.

>   o  Serial ports that work without having to buy Bell Tech's HUB or ICC card

****** To my knowledge, lots of third party serial port cards support Intel and
AT&T.  If you don't like the HUB, ICC or ACE you don't have to buy them, amigo.
If you've spent $783 to get support for some multiport card that costs within
$100 or $200 of our products (and almost always costs a lot more), what have
you saved?  Don't you know we will beat bona fide price on a competitive card? 
Do you really want to pay Microport $500 per installation to support a multi
port card when the originating vendor is too inexpert to do so?

>   o  Support for non-standard (ST-506 interface) MFM, ESDI, and RLL drives

******* This is pure idiocy.  You seem to forget, my friend, that it was Bell
Technologies that first put RLL and ESDI support into Microport.  The Intel/AT&T
release has the best non-ST-506, non-MFM, disk support of any release around.

>   o  Tape backup that works with standard Everex or Wangtek 60 & 125 Mb tape
>      drives (not just Bell Tech's own - ask them, their driver is designed
>      to only work with their drives)
****** Again, there are third parties supporting this (no less than AT&T!),
we support our own products to keep the support bandwidth down.  And what's
wrong with that? How much time have you spent today supporting SCO or 386/ix?.

>   o  A 30 day Installation Support and Money Back warranty - if it doesn't
>      work for any reason, send it back for a refund
****** Same here.  Our usual money back is 7 days, but we'll extend it to  30
days if anyone asks.  We charge half price, by the way, for any UNIX license
used for machine test or sales demo purposes ... How about you?

You know, John, there are lots of good choices for 80386 operating systems 
these days.  SCO has a fantastic offering, Interactive 386/ix is hot stuff, 
and Intel/AT&T have got a terrific UNIX engine cranking for the benefit of
us all.  Before you flame at Intel/AT&T too much you should acknowledge your
debt to them for putting you in business and helping you stay there.

Regards, 

Dimitri Rotow

pcm@iwarpj.intel.com (Phil C. Miller) (08/01/88)

In article <388@uport.UUCP> plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:

>	Intel, I hope you get your just rewards for coming
>	up with the @#$^%*&# 8086 and segments! 
>	-John Plocher



Dear John,

    Your mother wears segmented army boots.

Regards,

    Phil Miller
    Intel

plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) (08/02/88)

In article <739@mccc.UUCP> pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) writes:
>In article <382@uport.UUCP> plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:
>...What does the extra $783 get you from Microport?
>...  o  Me :-)
>...  -John Plocher
>
>OK - so where's the answer to my oft-repeated questions about "assign"
>and the LogiTech mouse, already?

With DosMerge 1.0 (and not 0.2 or 0.3) you add the following line to the file
/etc/dosdev
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.
dmouse d .23c-23f.5..     LogiTech Bus Mouse
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

where:	
	dmouse	= direct attach mouse, the "logical" name
	d	= direct attach
		  (v = virtual, r = real, f = file name, l = drive letter)
	23c-23f	= io port addresses
	5	= interrupt line
	..	= No DMA channels
		  The rest of the line is a comment


DosMerge versions before 1.0 won't work with many direct attach devices.

	-John Plocher

john@synsys.UUCP (John C. Rossmann) (08/02/88)

In article <388@uport.UUCP> plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:
><I do not intend this to become a shouting match - This is the last I will
>say in this conversation on the net - email works OK too, Dimitri>
>
>+---- In article <249@belltec.UUCP> Dimitri Rotow writes:
>| For starters this is dumb because we simply publish the operating system
>| that Intel and AT&T create.  It's not "Bell Tech" anything, it's Intel/AT&T

I'd just like to make a few comments as a user/owner of both Bell Tech V/386
and uPort V/AT.

1) Re: the 'roff's: As has been pointed out before, Documenter's Workbench
   aka "the 'roff's etc.", is no longer a part of "standard UNIX". Bitch at
   AT&T for that one.
2) I'm running Bell Tech V/386; it seems to be a solid product, and it hasn't
   given us any problems here yet. Why did we buy it and not uPort V/386? Well,
   for the whole ball of wax, including going out and buying the rest of the
   manuals in the Prentice-Hall standard V/386 editions, Bell Tech V/386 cost
   us somewhere in the neighborhood of $635 (unlimitied license, streams, nfs,
   etc., and DWB). I believe (and don't flame TOO hard if I'm off here :-))
   uPort V/386 would run about $1300 for the same thing (the uPort would
   include DWB docs - but you can order them from uPort! :-)). To John
   Plocher: I just can't see $650+ in added value in your product versus
   Bell Tech's. IMHO, of course.
3) Deficiencies in Bell Tech's UNIX:
   a) The EXACT configuration of your hard drive, including sectors/track,
      must be in the ROM BIOS table. 
   b) Some of the Bell Tech drivers. Yes, you must have a Bell Tech tape
      controller to use their driver. Under uPort V/AT, the Bell Tech
      controller works just fine with the stock uPort Everex drivers; yet
      the stock Everex controller will not work with the Bell Tech V/386
      drivers. To Dimitri Rotow (and this is from a MOSTLY satisfied
      customer): Why do you do this? Could it be because the tape controller
      and drive from Bell Tech is about $300-$400 (again, figures are "ball
      park") above the street price for the SAME hardware (except the con-
      troller ROM) from Everex? Mr. Rotow, this is NOT in line with Bell
      Tech's avowed goal of "passing DOS world economies of scale along to
      the UNIX customer" (a very free paraphrase of Bell Tech sales
      literature). Why not sell the hardware at a price closer to the
      generic? Do I sound a bit upset? Yes, I think that tying your driver
      to your hardware in this fashion is not in the best interests of
      your customers or your own business.
   c) There are a few utilities and programs that are supposed to be a part
      of the standard AT&T release that were not included with Bell Tech
      V/386: 1) crypt. Since I am a domestic customer this should be there.
      2) the graphics subsystem that is supposed to reside in /usr/bin/graf.
      These programs are listed in the System V/386 manuals, but they were
      not in the V/386 we received from Bell Tech. (I don't care if they
      don't support the generic hardware -- they still should be there).
      These two items are referred to by AT&T in the V/386 manuals as
      "Security Administration Utilities" and "Graphics Utilities". They
      are both a part of the "standard" V/386 release, according to the
      manuals. I can't find them on my system. If this is truly "complete",
      they should be there. PLEASE NOTE: I'VE BEEN MEANING TO CALL BELL
      TECH ABOUT THIS. I HAVEN'T YET. THEY MAY HAVE AN EXPLANATION, AND
      THEY MAY SHIP ME THE STUFF WHEN I CALL. (But it should be there
      already.)
4) Regarding our experiences with uPort V/AT (with allusions to Bell
   Tech V/386): We are now running uPort V/AT, release 2.3 on our 286
   box. It's the FIRST uPort release that has allowed fairly reliable
   access to the DOS partition on the hard drive. BUT the DOS partition
   access works ONLY if your drive is in the ROM table. I've tried with
   both a drive in the table and a drive not in the table. uPort's V/AT
   (i.e. UNIX) works even if your drive isn't in the table, just don't
   try to access the DOS partition or to type "DOS" at the boot prompt
   unless your drive is in the table. Note that this is on a Sperry PC-IT,
   but that shouldn't make a difference. In the area of updates, uPort has
   never shipped us an update unless we called and asked for it, even
   though we have the update service.
5) Tape drivers and uPort V/386: For John Plocher: Why didn't you guys
   stick to generic globals, etc., so we could buy your drivers for use
   with Bell Tech's OS? You chided Dimitri for putting an artificial ROM
   check to limit his drivers -- uPort could have easily taken precautions
   to make their drivers work with the generic port. (If we don't buy your
   OS, we could make you rich buying your drivers! :-)). It seems to me that
   you and Dimitri are the "pot and kettle" in this tape drive/driver arena.

I guess I've gotten a bit carried away, but I've been thinking about writing 
this article for about 2 weeks. I'll close with a brief summary:

uPort V/386 is just too expensive in comparison with Bell Tech V/386. That's
the bottom line, or so it seems to me.

Bell Tech V/386 is just a bit flawed, as so many have been pointing out,
but it's the best value around.

Again, all this is IMHO. And I'd like to thank both Dimitri Rotow and
John Plocher for their presence here and their responses.

John Rossmann		(uucp: uunet!synsys!john)	(CIS: 70701,3125)

zeeff@b-tech.UUCP (Jon Zeeff) (08/02/88)

In article <393@uport.UUCP> plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:
>
>With DosMerge 1.0 (and not 0.2 or 0.3) you add the following line to the file
>/etc/dosdev

Is DosMerge 1.0 something we can get *now*?


-- 
Jon Zeeff           		Branch Technology,
uunet!umix!b-tech!zeeff  	zeeff%b-tech.uucp@umix.cc.umich.edu

sullivan@vsi.UUCP (Michael T Sullivan) (08/03/88)

These wars by people at Microport vs. people at Bell are getting quite
tiresome.  Can they please stop.

-- 
Michael Sullivan			{uunet|attmail}!vsi!sullivan
					sullivan@vsi.com
V-Systems, Inc.  Santa Ana, CA		How about this, Dave?

ewv@zippy.berkeley.edu (Eric Varsanyi) (08/03/88)

This is it, I can't sit here and take this anymore. I've delt with Bell Tech
a few times now and received nothing but slime in return. If you don't
like flaming, hit n now...

In article <249@belltec.UUCP> dar@belltec.UUCP (Dimitri Rotow) writes:
>>  o  Bell Tech unbundles the license, the media, and the manuals; does not
>>     provide DWB.
>
>Wrong.  We sell it for $45.

Unsupported and very reluctantly, if you ask a sales person they will tell you
they do not sell the DWB. If you press you find out you can get it AS IS,
good luck.

>> fees to AT&T easier.  Bell Tech sells Unix (with their drivers) at almost
>> their cost because they hope to sell you their hardware and make up for the
>> low price that way.
>
>Wrong.  We sell UNIX cheap for the same reason we helped Microport get started.

I'd love to hear how Bell Tech helped get uPort started, I havn't heard this
story yet.

>We think a solid, non-proprietarized UNIX sponsored by Intel and AT&T which is
>sold for the same price as DOS helps everyone in the UNIX market (except maybe

You get floppies and documentation with DOS.

>those companies that have an ax to grind keeping it proprietarized and over-

Like companies that burn new proms for their tape drives so their software
can detect if its being used on another vendors h/w and refuse to work?

>priced).  We make a lot more money from software value added than hardware.

I thought you guys sold Unix from AT&T/Intel untouched... wheres the value added
part? Would it be possible that the value added stuff is only applicable on
hardware purchased from BT?

>>   o  Support for non-standard (ST-506 interface) MFM, ESDI, and RLL drives
>
>******* This is pure idiocy.  You seem to forget, my friend, that it was Bell
>Technologies that first put RLL and ESDI support into Microport.  The Intel/AT&T
>release has the best non-ST-506, non-MFM, disk support of any release around.

THIS IS PURE CRAP!!!!! Bell Tech will NOT sell you an RLL driver unless you
buy their RLL drive (suprise). Current uPort RLL/ESDI support is from uPort
directly, I know since I worked on it. It is not marred by any contact with
BT nor does it require their 'custom' hardware. Neither does it require a
Bell Tech AT clone with special entries in the ROM BIOS. On a final note,
Bell Tech informed me that they no longer support Microport, so now you
have to buy their hardware exclusively if you want to run their software.

>>   o  Tape backup that works with standard Everex or Wangtek 60 & 125 Mb tape
>>      drives (not just Bell Tech's own - ask them, their driver is designed
>>      to only work with their drives)
>****** Again, there are third parties supporting this (no less than AT&T!),
>we support our own products to keep the support bandwidth down.  And what's
>wrong with that? How much time have you spent today supporting SCO or 386/ix?.

Well, at least he didn't contradict himself in the same sentence.  If you
don't support other vendors then stop bragging about the "RLL" support you
put into uPort (hah).

I think the key word above is support. Microport supports their stuff (maybe
not as well as some might like). Bell Tech sells AT&T stuff and definitely
does not support it. I asked what the scenario would be if I found a bug
in, say, shl and the sxt driver. (Not that I would ever use those :) )
I think the best response I got was that if I bought a (expensive) service
contract, they would let me talk to their techs (who handle hardware as well)
for something like 4 hours. Their problem solving ability is limited to
reporting the bugs to AT&T. They cannot, and will not fix code. I assume
the situation is different with their in house device drivers. uPort,
on the other hand, actually has people who understand Unix and are
willing to fix problems, and they have source from AT&T so they CAN
fix problems. They are not driven by hardware marketing, rather, they want
their software to be successful, they have a vested interest in seeing that
their stuff runs on as many different configurations as possible, not just
in house brands.
>
>>   o  A 30 day Installation Support and Money Back warranty - if it doesn't
>>      work for any reason, send it back for a refund
>****** Same here.  Our usual money back is 7 days, but we'll extend it to  30
>days if anyone asks.  We charge half price, by the way, for any UNIX license
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^
	 Read: You have to flame at the sales manager. I asked if maybe 7
         days wasn't just a little ridiculous. The salesperson was as unmoving
	 as a granite wall.

>us all.  Before you flame at Intel/AT&T too much you should acknowledge your
>debt to them for putting you in business and helping you stay there.

Please! Everyone has to pay the license fees. We all keep AT&T in business
(the Unix business anyway). I don't think John was flaming Intel/At&T
either. I think he flaming a company who is interested in selling hardware
and couldn't sell the stuff for enough money in the DOS world, so they
snag a copy of the ISC port and sell at rock bottom prices. The only
catch is you have to use their devices and their device drivers ($$$)..

>
>Regards, 
>
>Dimitri Rotow

Don't for a second think that BT is in the s/w business. I while back I posted
asking about X windows. This was after a lot of mumbo jumbo hand waving
from Dimitri about their X support. I asked if BT would sell X windows
to run on uPort unix with a Hercules or EGA card. He said they would, and you
even got floppies (a change from their normal bait-and-switch tactics)and
documentation. All for $95.

Good luck, their sales people claim adamantly that they only support
BT unix, and that they have dropped all support for uPort. AND, the
herc stuff is all unsupported even on BT unix. Sigh. Althoug, if you
buy their blit card they will be happy to support you. BT is obviously 
a software driven company, anyone can see that.

I typically don't flame on like this, but this BT stuff was just
getting under my skin. I have had pretty good luck with uPort,
their stuff still has some problems, but at least they have some
incentive to fix them.

-Eric Varsanyi
 Cray Research

bill@ssbn.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy) (08/04/88)

In article <4664@b-tech.UUCP> zeeff@b-tech.UUCP (Jon Zeeff) writes:
>In article <393@uport.UUCP> plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:
>>
>>With DosMerge 1.0 (and not 0.2 or 0.3) you add the following line to the file
>>/etc/dosdev
>
>Is DosMerge 1.0 something we can get *now*?

I was (not very politely) informed "we do not update a beta with a beta".
My Merge/386 was 0.2 and had `BETA' marked out with magic marker.  There
was no discount or anything, full list price, but it didn't work with the
Computone Intelliport AT-4 or AT-8.  The boards and driver worked OK with
Merge not installed.  The vendor who sold me the boards, this was in April,
told me that 1.0 was available so I tried to get it.

I suppose I can sympathize with Microport for not wanting to have a lot of
stuff rattle around out there, but until now, I learned to expect one or
more of the following if I was a beta site -

being informed I was a beta site (there was a letter thanking the "pioneers")
volunteering to be a beta site
price break
technical support
frequent bug fixes and updates
free update to the commercial release

Merge/386?  `None of the above'.  I shouldn't say that, I did get some
help from technical support, "try another low level format".  After the
third trip up that dead end street I wrote it off and went on.  John
Plocher is cited in this followup and he alludes to knowing that there
are problems in earlier versions (which means there *WERE*), but my
problems happened before he was there.  I've seen nothing in this or
any other group to indicate that anyone at Microport, other than John,
is committed or even interested in fixing anything.  BTW, `' things are
me, "" things are verbatim quotes from Microport.

That's not a flame, it's not meant to make anyone angry.  It's just a
playback of my own experience.  On the flip side, I am a satisfied
user of V/AT, I haven't had the courage to install Merge/286 yet but I
haven't put VP/ix on my SCO system either, so that makes me a fraidy.
After my experiences with Merge/386 I don't mind admitting I'm jumpy.
-- 
Bill Kennedy  usenet      {killer,att,rutgers,sun!daver,uunet!bigtex}!ssbn!bill
              internet    bill@ssbn.WLK.COM

pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) (08/04/88)

In article <393@uport.UUCP> plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:
...DosMerge versions before 1.0 won't work with many direct attach devices.
...
...	-John Plocher


So, how does one get V1.0?  I have the "beta test" version.

In fact, how does one find out about new versions of V/386, DosMerge, etc.?

Thanks,
Pete

karl@njs.UUCP (karl) (08/05/88)

In article <393@uport.UUCP> plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:
>In article <739@mccc.UUCP> pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) writes:
>>In article <382@uport.UUCP> plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:
>>...What does the extra $783 get you from Microport?
>>...  o  Me :-)
>>...  -John Plocher
>>
>>OK - so where's the answer to my oft-repeated questions about "assign"
>>and the LogiTech mouse, already?
>
>With DosMerge 1.0 (and not 0.2 or 0.3) you add the following line to the file
>	-John Plocher

Hi john, first, I'd like to thank you for at least making a example by replying
to me with a list of promises.  Just after your response, I tried calling you
the very next day.  You were in a meeting.  And the day after, you were also
in a meeting.  Now knowing, full well that people in California are either in
a meeting or at lunch, I found it reassuring at that at least you were in the
building.  I was able to get some help, from a 386 support person, until we
both ran into a problem getting my 386 DOS merge beta release 0.2 to talk to
my printer.  The support person could'nt figure it out, and just said...
"I dunno..play around with it, maybe you can get it to work."  Well, now that
I paid that extra $783, could you please tell how much more I have to spend
to get a working DosMerge?  Please explain to everyone on the net how those
poor unspecting people who glading ordered and paid for Dosmerge, found it
very interesting to see that what they purchased was a "PRE-RELEASE".  I
still can't get dos to talk directly to the printer (/dev/lp) and my SERIAL
logitech mouse doesn't work.  Talk about truth in advertising, maybe its time
your ads should say "DosMerge" and "Greenhills" comming soon.  I still can 
get any answer about Dosmerge 1.0, and what I have to do to get it.

Important note: I'm not trying to give microport a bad name or John a hard
time.  I just a poor customer trying to get my computer to work.  I'm going
to get very mad, though when one of my customers forces me to give them
a $10,000. refund on a hardware package, because my hands are tied and I
can't support them.  They tell me I lied to them about Greenhills, I lied
to them about getting their tape drive to work, I lied about that promised
"pre-release" version that was being sent out, the next day (two months ago)
to fix their floating point problem.

Now, an un-emotional re-cap of open problems with system V/386:

	- Tape driver for Everex 60M cassette style tape back does nothing.
	  (system just hangs). EV-830.  I of course fixed this by eating
	  a $600.00 tape drive and replacing it with one that works.  If
	  you won't fix it or everex isn't helping, stop telling people it
	  works.  It would have saved me $600.00.  (know anybody who wants
	  a 60M tape drive for DOS?)

	- No documentation on using the link kit for the Beta 0.2 pre-release
	  version of the DosMerge kernal.  I figured this one out by playing
	  with the /etc/mkunix shell script.  The support person at microport
	  never played with it, and if fact never heard about "/etc/mergeconf".

	- No way to directly connect /dev/lp to DosMerge, and the spooler
	  program under unix truncates all those nifty graphics files down
	  to some unknown line width.  I've made a device with 128 added to
	  the device driver.  At least I can print by sending everything to
	  a file, and "cat <file> > /dev/lp".  The support person (a nice guy)
	  said "I donno...maybe try the new lp driver from the BBS".

	- My logitech mouse, (after directly connecting it to COM1 to dos),
	  scatters the pointer rapidly all over the screen, and the buttons
	  don't work.  This is very strange to me since my DosMerge doc tells
	  me the Microsoft mouse does not work, buy a logitech. (or at least
	  their driver.  By the way I am using a serial mouse connected to
	  COM1. Which is directly connected to dos with the dosdev file.

	- Floating point operations on a WedgeTech. 386 mother board does
	  not work.  The compiler crashes, a simple program...
		main() { float x; x=1.0; }
	  will not compile, and most of the time it just stops the system.
	  A support person a microport said "oh we've fixed that already in
	  house, so I'll send you a special version to fix it".  I been able
	  to work around this by letting them to compile their application
	  on my system, and take binaries to their office.  Of course, this
	  reduces them to a integer only 386 system.  Fun. (I'm sorry 
	  I said no-emotion)

	- Greenhills updates, and Pre-release DosMerge 386s.  The customer
	  with the floating point problem, was very excited to see that in
	  your ad back in april, when I talked them into buying it. And in
	  May, they purchased it, and without warning, no greenhills.  Now
	  every time their programmer comes over to my office to use my system
	  to compile, I get an earfull.  And since I only have a Two user
	  license, I have to kick my other programmer off of the system, just
	  so I can pay him to watch the other guy program.

JOHN...IF YOU ARE OUT THERE...PLEASE LISTEN, if you can't call, send me mail,
send me a letter, send me a FAX, but please tell me just what is going to
happen you my "pre-release" DosMerge.  Getting mad, and throwing around sarcastic
comments is un-productive.  Its hard because while I'm typing this I get
emotional.  Lets be friends, and fix these problems.

Thank you ahead of time.

Karl Vollbrecht  (Vollbrecht & Associates)
Voice / FAX  :  (414) 358-1180

zeeff@b-tech.UUCP (Jon Zeeff) (08/05/88)

In article <208@ssbn.WLK.COM> bill@ssbn.UUCP (Bill Kennedy) writes:

>being informed I was a beta site (there was a letter thanking the "pioneers")

I agree with what Bill said.  The only difference that I had was that 
my copy did include a letter stating that I would be sent a final 
release version within 60 days.  This was in early January.  On the 
other hand, while uport was overly optimistic, they did have problems 
getting a solid release from Locus.  Last I heard, it should be ready 
on Sep 1.  I'll probably be asking for a refund (via my lawyer if 
necessary) if I don't hear anything soon.  


-- 
Jon Zeeff           		Branch Technology,
uunet!umix!b-tech!zeeff  	zeeff%b-tech.uucp@umix.cc.umich.edu

rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson) (08/06/88)

In article <208@ssbn.WLK.COM> bill@ssbn.UUCP (Bill Kennedy) writes:
>haven't put VP/ix on my SCO system either, so that makes me a fraidy.
>After my experiences with Merge/386 I don't mind admitting I'm jumpy.

With all the heavyweights lined up behind VP/ix, it seems the writing
is on the wall as to which is the better product.




-- 
		Rick Richardson, PC Research, Inc.

(201) 542-3734 (voice, nights)   OR     (201) 389-8963 (voice, days)
uunet!pcrat!rick (UUCP)			rick%pcrat.uucp@uunet.uu.net (INTERNET)