Xenix? Really? (was Re: Unlimited software warranties)

[John G. DeArmond]

sef at kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes:

>In article <VR.9HWB at xds13.ferranti.com> peter at ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>>Show me where it's being sold. How do I vote with my pocketbook if there
>>are no names on the ballot?

>SCO XENIX.  Everyone wanted to go to SysVr3.2; SCO didn't create the market,
>you know.  Despite XENIX being very stable, small, and fast, people wanted
>"real" UNIX.  Because of the features, partially, and partially because of
>the name.

Really?  On what planet?  What I see from the outside as a consultant is 
SCO trying to dump Xenix and will do so as soon as the existing customer 
base turns its head long enough.

I have 2 different clients who are going through the expense of porting
from a proprietary OS (Xenix) to Unix PRECISELY because SCO is telling
them that Xenix is going away.  In one case, we waited for over 9 months
for Win/TCP for Xenix/386 while SCO was telling us Real Soon Now.  
At the very same time, Wollingong told us that SCO had told them that 
Xenix was going away so they were not porting to Xenix/386.

All this, of course, leaves the company that wants to stay with SCO 
with only the SCO Unix disaster.  Both of my long term SCO VAR clients looked
at the situation and went elsewhere.  

Of course, I expect you to say that this is the month that SCO tells people
that Xenix is here to stay.  You outta remember 2 things:  a) only
IBM gets away with FUD and b) you outta save your SCO marketing pap for
the biz heirarchy where people don't know any better.

John

-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC        | "Purveyors of speed to the Trade"  (tm)
Rapid Deployment System, Inc. |  Home of the Nidgets (tm)
Marietta, Ga                  | 
{emory,uunet}!rsiatl!jgd      |"Politically InCorrect.. And damn proud of it