rick@comspec.UUCP (Rick McCalla) (02/06/90)
We are a small company that has been using Xenix as the base for computer systems that mainly serve companies as a central database for custom accounting applications, spreadsheets and wordprocessing. Although we haven't put in any as yet there is also some future requirements for networking and VPix. In all previous applications users were supported through intelligent IO cards. Up to now we have been using SCO Xenix 286 and 386 but with all the talk about SCO phasing out Xenix we have been thinking of going to a 386 Unix as our base platform. This has left me totally confused as to which way to go as there seems to be a lot of gripes about all the Unix's. One person will recommend one and another will say that it is slow or buggy. Two we are thinking about is SCO Unix and Interactive 386ix. Does anyone have any comments about which will be the best way to go as far as performnace, price, support and how buggy is it? Any help would be greatly appreciated. -- Comspec Communications Inc. | Rick McCalla ----- rick@comspec Toronto, Ontario Canada |---------------------------------- Voice : (416) 785 - 3553 | Path: uunet!mnetor!becker! Fax : (416) 785 - 3668 | comspec!rick
neal@mnopltd.UUCP (02/06/90)
-> ..........
->Up to now we have been using SCO Xenix 286 and 386 but with all the talk about
->SCO phasing out Xenix we have been thinking of going to a 386 Unix as our base
->platform.
-> ..........
->Does anyone have any comments about which will be the best way to go as far as
->performnace, price, support and how buggy is it?
->Any help would be greatly appreciated.
->
-> ..........
I will attempt to paraphrase statements made by the National Sales Manager,
Dealer Sales, for SCO at a presentation last night for the Atlanta Unix Users
Group:
If you do not need the features of SCO Unix, primarily Open Desktop,
B2 security, etc there is no reason to upgrade. Xenix STILL outsells
SCO Unix 3 to 1! Xenix will be supported for many years to come. It
is still the fastest and smallest for the 386. Xenix is mature,
while SCO Unix is a new product with the expected quantity of bugs.
The other bit of information to be gleaned was the impression that Merge386 is
faster on SCO Unix than Vp/ix is on Xenix.
Clear as mud, eh? We are sticking with Xenix for a while...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neal Rhodes MNOP Ltd (404)- 972-5430
President Lilburn (atlanta) GA 30247 Fax: 978-4741
uunet!emory!jdyx!mnopltd!neal Or uunet!gatech!stiatl!mnopltd!neal
------------------------------------------------------------------------------mark@promark.UUCP (Mark J. DeFilippis) (02/12/90)
In article <156@mnopltd.UUCP>, neal@mnopltd.UUCP writes: > -> .......... > ->Does anyone have any comments about which will be the best way to go as far as > I will attempt to paraphrase statements made by the National Sales Manager, > Dealer Sales, for SCO at a presentation last night for the Atlanta Unix Users > Group: > > If you do not need the features of SCO Unix, primarily Open Desktop, > B2 security, etc there is no reason to upgrade. Xenix STILL outsells > SCO Unix 3 to 1! Xenix will be supported for many years to come. It There are other factors to consider. For instance NFS will not be available for SCO XENIX. NFS will onlyu be available for the SCO UNIX product. :-( NFS alone for some could be a major reason to upgrade. I see as another factor the problem of getting device drivers for many 3rd party board makers such as intelligent multi-port boards, intelligent I/O controllers. I have been unable to nail down several of them on availibility of device drivers for their products for SCO UNIX. SCO generally has a track record of moving quickly to market, whereas many of these vendors (I leave nameless here as to not generate defense articles of individual encounters) are slow to port their drivers. -- Mark J. DeFilippis SA @ Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Adelphi University, Garden City, NY 11530 (516) 663-1170 UUCP: philabs!sbcs!bnlux0!adelphi!markd