O'pain Software Foundation: (2) Why is it better than AT&T?

[Dora_Group]

In article <637 at spectrix.UUCP>, clewis at spectrix.UUCP (Chris Lewis) writes:
> I find it even harder to accept that (by inference) that anything IBM 
> is involved in has our best interests at heart either.
> 
> Speaking as one who has worked for IBM in C language definition, I have
> a few points:
> 
> 	- All appearances to the contrary, IBM has been firmly against
> 	  UNIX since the mid seventies.  You see, they have these major
> 	  mid and mainframes to flog, and UNIX just cuts into that market.
> 	  Even though they've built, or have had built for them, at least 
> 	  a dozen variants of UNIX, only two or three have ever seen the 
> 	  light of day, and customers are discouraged as much as possible 
> 	  from using them (eg: IX/370, VM/IX etc.).  They'd much rather
> 	  UNIX just simply quietly fade away.  Many times in the past IBM
> 	  has announced that they have taken steps to change this.  Nothing
> 	  much ever happened (with the minor exception of A/IX).
> 	  
> 	  Why should this time be any different?  I'll believe it when I 
> 	  see it.
> 
> 	- IBM believes only in standards that they invent.  I mean, who
> 	  else uses EBCDIC?  And they can't even agree on what version of
> 	  EBCDIC for crying out loud.  

AND 

In article <7988 at brl-smoke.ARPA>, gwyn at brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) writes:
> The counter-argument is that no matter whether it is marginally better
> or marginally worse, so long as it is different, application developers
> will have to deal with it (unless it were not much used, but with DEC
> and IBM pushing it, it will be used regardless of its merit).
> 
> The users lose because the developers lose.

People,

Doesn't this get to the central motivation for the OSF arrangement --
splintering and confusion.  We all know OSF has nothing to do with
standards and open systems.  It is a blatant attempt by the market
captors to retain control of their captive audience.  The idea of a
customer shopping around for the best/cheapest/most reliable hardware
makes them wretch.

Let's face it, UNIX is the best thing since sliced bread.  With it, a
system designer/programmer is bound only by his/her imagination.  We can
make it do whatever we please and if done carefully, in a way that is
hardware independent.  I think developers, users, and key OSF members
have always realized this, but had also known that it would take a lot
of clout to give UNIX momentum and credibility.  A perturbation in
captivity has come and it is alarming the captors.  It has finally come
to the point where the developers -- who have been designing successful
applications on UNIX boxes and selling them everywhere else but on UNIX
boxes -- have seen $$ in a single UNIX that has mass appeal.  I think
the masses are finally seeing the light also -- we don't have to be
locked in, we do have choices.  This is a very alarming thought to the
captors -- "We can't turn the users' world upside down every three or
four years anymore with new architectures and new operating systems and
new bus interfaces and total system re-writes etc...."  If the users
want the new technology they can buy it from who is offering the best
price/performance and not worry about their applications.  Can you
imagine the fear that instills in the captors when threatened by users
who would no longer be captive -- enough fear to get in bed with an arch
rival to kill the infant in its cradle.

Something else troubles me, I've read the phrase "we'll be stuck with
AT&T" -- what does that mean?  What am I missing?  Is there something
inherently wrong with AT&T that I don't know about?  Can someone
elaborate please?  From the info I currently have I'd have to say we're
all lucky to be STUCK with the transistor and lasers and fiber optics
and etc.......  What has AT&T done to so many of you that you would see
them fail?  Hell -- all of this noise about OSF was and is inspired by
UNIX.  Where did it come from?   Is AT&T that bad?  When was the last
time any of you picked up the phone and it didn't work?  When couldn't
you complete a call?  How many of you realize the technology behind the
network that enables the reliability?  Ask you parents and grandparents
the same question and see what they say.  It seems to me that AT&T has a
history of quality goods and services.  So someone tell me what the
problem is.  I for one have been very happy with the quality of the
service and products I've received from them.

If it's that they were a monopoly and that bothers you, then what about
the account control that captors use to lock users in.  Isn't that very
similar?  What about captors who would promise a disk drive manufacturer
unlimited demand and then telling him he isn't needed due to the captors
decision to manufacture its own new standard drive leaving the little
guy out of business with unwanted inventory.  Isn't that very similar?
What about captors that drop support for certain pieces of hardware and
software forcing a user to upgrade?  Isn't that very similar?  I could
go on.

We have the opportunity to stop being captive and to start using some
really robust, EXTENSIBLE, tools and software -- let's not screw it up.

Thanx,
Dora Allen   6/1/88