🚀 go-pugleaf

| In article <42143@sun.uucp> chuq@sun.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach) writes:
| Until the low end boxes have mac caliber software, it's going to be VERY
| hard for them to go in after Mac environments. The low end unix box is good
| for low end unix. It isn't terribly good for spreadsheets, word processing,
| etc. The Mac2/AUX is probably more likely to suck out sales from the low end
| of the other manufacturers simply because it can run both Unix AND Mac
| stuff, not the other way around. 
| 

In article <8184@eddie.MIT.EDU> zrm@eddie.MIT.EDU (Zigurd R. Mednieks) writes:
| It's odd that Chuck would think this way. My feeling is that A/UX will
| not be popular with either Mac or Unix people. If I wanted a Unix,
| I would buy a Sun. I would not buy A/UX for my MacII. AU/X is not as
| good a Unix as a Sun and it is not as good a Macintosh as a Macintosh
| running its own OS. I would get LESS of Unix and Macintosh than I
| wanted. 

   Well, I'm a Unix people, and I found that I could have almost
anything that I actually **use** on unix on a mac, even before A/UX.
In the process of laying groundwork for A/UX, Apple made MPW
sufficiently Unix-like that porting simple programs was trivial.
   The worst time I had was porting wart (a yacc-like DFA compiler),
because I had brain-damaged it in a port to a customer's MuSh-DOS
box.  That took an extra 10 to 20 minutes...

   I seriously expect that A/UX will deliver more ease of use to
experienced Unix programmers than Sun (I've used both: horses for
courses).  I also seriously believe that many Mac-specific programs
will run under A/UX, and will be welcomed by Unix programmers.

 --dave (you mean you **like** dbx?) c-b
-- 
 David Collier-Brown.                 {mnetor yunexus utgpu}!geac!daveb
 Geac Computers International Inc.,   |  Computer Science loses its
 350 Steelcase Road,Markham, Ontario, |  memory (if not its mind) 
 CANADA, L3R 1B3 (416) 475-0525 x3279 |  every 6 months.