🚀 go-pugleaf

>> On Sun, 14 Nov 93 04:42:06 GMT, olson@anchor.esd.sgi.com (Dave
>> Olson) said:

  DO> SGI has had "propietary" extensions in its compilers for *at least*
  DO> 6 years.  That is to say, we have added features, etc.  That's what
  DO> distinguishes most 'real' computer companies from their competitors;
  DO> they add features.  Otherwise everybody is building clones, which
  DO> may be good for prices (and to be fair, compatibility), but isn't
  DO> terribly good for adding value, new features, new capabilities,
  DO> etc.

Adding features is fine (although usually they're no good and cannot
be used because those who choose Unix systems choose also for
platform-independent applications, and those of SGI aren't
particularly worthwhile IMO) but not when it breaks compatability as
badly as SGI does.

  DO> If you can afford to buy Workshop (it ain't cheap), you can certainly
  DO> afford to buy the SGI development system.

It doesn't have to do with money, but with compatability. I want to
use the same tools on every platform (like compilers, debugger) and
this is one of the big plusses of Unix systems, but less and less for SGI.
-- 
_______________________________________________________________
Peter Mutsaers, Bunnik (Ut), the Netherlands.