O'pain Software Foundation: (3) relationship to GNU & openness

[Chang]

In article <4457 at vdsvax.steinmetz.ge.com>, barnett at vdsvax.steinmetz.ge.com (Bruce G. Barnett) writes:
> 
> 	If it works, we will have two or more different Unicii.
> 	Different specifications for different features.
> 
> 	If it doesn't, the people developing OSF will have to do twice
> 	as much work when adding extensions. Because they will have to
> 	implement two sets of extensions (networking, window systems,
> 	lightweight processes, dynamic linking, network file system,
> 	security, toolkits, real-time, redundancy, sys-admin, mapped
> 	files, 	etc.)
> 
> 
> If the gamble works, we lose.
> If the gamble doesn't work, they lose and we lose.
>
(stuff deleted) 
> -- 
> 	Bruce G. Barnett 	<barnett at ge-crd.ARPA> <barnett at steinmetz.UUCP>
> 				uunet!steinmetz!barnett

   I don't think it is a gamble.  It is a carefully planned business
move.  Especially for IBM, they don't depend on saling UNIX box at
all.  Even if this move are going to failed, they've already muddy
the water and create a lot of confusion.  Whenever people have doubt
or confused they tend to hold back and wait. You've already seem
what happened in PC market when they announced PS/2.  They have
nothing to lose and probably something to gain.  If the move works, 
this move will prevent UNIX ever merging into a single standard
and challenge their proprietary OS market and at the same time they
can get an easy entry into the "AIX" market. 

If the gamble works, they win.
If the gamble doesn't work, they win too.


Fangli Chang
(312)979-2502

Disclaimer: above are my opinion only.
My employer do not share my opinion, despite that I hope they do.