rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (10/30/90)
bader+@andrew.cmu.edu (Miles Bader) writes: > ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) writes: > > but I can certainly imagine an American company that wants to compete > > in the UNIX-successor marketplace being pretty annoyed that Uncle Sam > > is funding their competitor to give them a big price advantage. > Annoyed companies can get a mach distribution, buy all the redistribution > licences from AT&T, etc., and sell mach themselves... Andy is looking at a different viewpoint here. (I was being dense about it too, neglecting to consider Chorus, or for that matter his Amoeba work...he kindly explained in email.) Suppose that the annoyed companies want to take their own approach? In other words, imagine a UNIX successor which is *not* Mach-based. A lot of people are very interested in Mach, and doing some interesting work, but there are various reasons it's not seen as the One True Successor to UNIX. There are some tough issues: Should the US govt stay entirely out of OS development? I sure hope not; I'd hate to think of how long it might have taken to get some of the work in BSD to happen via the System n releases. But where does it get to be competition between govt and private industry. At what point is the govt helping with work that private industry can't afford to do, vs letting private industry be lazy? -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com -or- ico!rcd Boulder, CO (303)449-2870 ...Never offend with style when you can offend with substance.