home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.hardware
- Path: sparky!uunet!ferkel.ucsb.edu!taco!Ziggy.csl.ncsu.edu!acb
- From: acb@Ziggy.csl.ncsu.edu (Andrew C. Burnette)
- Subject: Re: Why is Sun abandoning SunOS4.1.3?
- Message-ID: <1992Dec31.065926.18584@ncsu.edu>
- Sender: news@ncsu.edu (USENET News System)
- Organization: North Carolina State University
- References: <C03HLL.41z@fsg.com> <16178@auspex-gw.auspex.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 06:59:26 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <16178@auspex-gw.auspex.com>, guy@Auspex.COM (Guy Harris) writes:
- |> >Neither IBM
- |> >nor DEC, nor any of the other OSF players ever actually committed to
- |> >*using* OSF/1 on their machines.
- |>
- |> To be fair, DEC does seem to be moving in the direction of having OSF/1
- |> be their UNIX offering; their last position was, I think, that they'd
- |> even put it on their MIPS-based machines.
- |>
- |> However, I've not heard any committment from IBM or HP to use OSF/1 in
- |> its entirety on all their UNIX platforms, although IBM is, I think,
- |> using it as the basis for the AIX running on 390's and maybe PS/2's (not
- |> to be confused with the AIX running on RS/6000's).
- Dec has committed to support OSF-1 on the alpha chip 2Q93.
- Their mips based systems will eventually get OSF-1 also, BUT it is only
- a bug fixed version of the developers release which is out now.
- IBM and HP have retreated, and will not support OSF-1 and it's mach kernel in
- their respective OS's. In any case, I think they are all moving toward
- the system V.4 interface definition, so the differences *should* be small.
- Later,
- --
- ******************************************************************************
- Andrew C. Burnette acb@ncsu.edu
- Electrical and Computer Engineering
-
-