Version 2.1 of AMIGA UNIX SVR4 (R) Introduced
Jan Carlson
COMMODORE (R) PUTS POWER OF UNIX WITHIN MORE AMIGA USERS' REACH
Version 2.1 of UNIX SVR4 (R) Introduced
Now Available at 40% Price Reduction
------------------------------------
West Chester, Pa. -- February 12, 1992 -- In response to
changing market conditions, Commodore Business Machines, Inc.,
is making the increased performance of UNIX available to more
AMIGA users.
The company introduces Version 2.1 of AMIGA UNIX System V
Release 4 (SVR4) -- an operating system module for AMIGA 2000
and 3000 series machines. Version 2.1 allows standard access
to the X Window System (TM) and Open Look (TM) for the desktop
environment. In addition, it provides standard networking
capabilities such as TCP/IP, NFS (TM) and RFS (TM) to handle
networking across different environments.
"AMIGA UNIX is easy to use and structured for future growth,"
said Geoff Stilley, vice president sales, Commodore. "Version
2.1 can be installed on the same hard disk in different
partitions as both AmigaDOS (TM) and MS-DOS (TM) for more
extended functionality."
Version 2.1 provides several user interface shells,
including Bourne Shell, C Shell, Korn Shell, Restricted Shell,
Remote Shell and Job Control Shell. Also, it features a
simple-to-use e-mail system, plus emacs and vi, two
screen-based text and program editors. Multiple virtual
screens are available in addition to multiple windows, so each
of several users can have a screen on the same machine, or a
user can have separate virtual screens for different uses.
"With Version 2.1, AMIGA users now have significantly
increased performance," Stilley said. "It is a full
implementation of UNIX SVR4 and includes additional useful
features at a very competitive market price."
The Version 2.1 bundle includes manuals and documentation,
a magnetic tape containing the operating system and other
utilities, and boot disks for loading and installing Version
2.1. A two user license can be purchased as of February 12,
1992 for $995, and an unlimited user license costs $1195.
--- ----
More information is available through Authorized Commodore
Dealers.
As part of the AMIGA UNIX Version 2.1 introduction,
Commodore has announced a reduction on their AMIGA 3000UX
Systems effective until April 30, 1992. The AMIGA 3000UX CPU
will include the UNIX Version 2.1 Operating System, a 200
MByte drive, nine MBytes of RAM, keyboard, 3 button mouse, the
2410 high-resolution color card, and Ethernet (R) card (for
both thick and thin Ethernet), plus the customer's choice of
either an A1950 color monitor or an A3070 tape drive (SCSI)
unit, for $4998.00. Sold separately, the suggested list price
of this system is $8495.00.
"The introductory pricing is a part of Commodore's goal to
provide technical solutions at affordable prices for users,"
Stilley said. "The AMIGA 3000UX is not just another hardware
clone, it provides a unique platform of this industry standard
operating system."
Commodore Business Machines, based in West Chester, Pa.,
markets a complete line of computers and peripherals for
business, education, government and consumer markets.
Commodore is a registered trademark of Commodore
Electronics, Ltd. AMIGA, AMIGA 3000UX and AmigaDOS are
trademarks of Commodore-Amiga, Inc. UNIX and UNIX SVR4 are
registered trademarks of UNIX Systems Laboratories, Inc. and
Open Look is a trademark of AT&T. X Window System is a
trademark of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. NFS
is a registered trademark of Sun Microsystems.
# # #
Rob Healey
=
= COMMODORE (R) PUTS POWER OF UNIX WITHIN MORE AMIGA USERS' REACH
= Version 2.1 of UNIX SVR4 (R) Introduced
=
Hopefully they'll find a good excuse to extend the $5k price for an
indefinite period of time since that's the only way a UXD can be
competitive with other UNIX solutions out there.
One burning question:
How much will the 1.1 to 2.1 upgrade cost the suffering 1.1 masses?
This is one glaring ommision from the press release. Normally
upgrade procedures are mentioned in this sort of release.
Thanks to those inside C= who helped to make the release a
reality. And a BIG thanks to those not working at C= anymore who
made most of 2.x UNIX a reality.
Hopefully, C= will make a turn around in UNIX now.
The $995 and $1195 ARE great prices for SVR4, however I'm
not so sure the Amiga community in general can afford this. Hopefully
enough VAR's, probably in Europe, can make turnkey solutions to
help increase the volume and reduce the price.
-Rob
David Kessner
> Dealers.
Hey! We _ARE_ the dealers (the last in Denver, CO) and we have _NO_
information at all... Geez, lets get with it.
Between you guys and Newtek's fumbling we should just say screw it and go
into some other line of work...
At any rate, what's the deal with 2.1... What does it do differently?
> [a UX system...] for $4998.00.
Ha! Some reduced price! It's been sold at that price for several months
now. Still too much if you ask me. NeXT's are still cheaper, faster, and
is more complete system-- for less!
--
David Kessner - da...@kessner.denver.co.us Reunite Pangea!
1135 Fairfax, Denver CO 80220 (303) 377-1801 (p.m.)
do { ... } while( jones);
David S. Masterson
> In article <63...@amix.commodore.com> ja...@amix.commodore.com (Jan Carlson)
> writes:
> =
> = COMMODORE (R) PUTS POWER OF UNIX WITHIN MORE AMIGA USERS' REACH
> = Version 2.1 of UNIX SVR4 (R) Introduced
> =
> Hopefully, C= will make a turn around in UNIX now.
> The $995 and $1195 ARE great prices for SVR4, however I'm not so sure the
> Amiga community in general can afford this. Hopefully enough VAR's, probably
> in Europe, can make turnkey solutions to help increase the volume and reduce
> the price.
From the headlines of UNIX Today (Feb. 17):
'UNIX Lite' On Tap: USL to premiere in April an SVR4
version tailored for the Desktop
Amongst other things, Univel (a joint venture between USL and Novell) is
developing a $200 to $300 version of SVR4 for Intel-based PCs with a GUI, DOS
support and Netware hooks.
I've always said that AT&T should look into scaling down UNIX for the low-cost
market, but where does this leave Commodore and Amiga UNIX?
--
====================================================================
David Masterson Consilium, Inc.
(415) 691-6311 640 Clyde Ct.
uunet!cimshop!davidm Mtn. View, CA 94043
====================================================================
David Miller
> Hopefully they'll find a good excuse to extend the $5k price for an
> indefinite period of time since that's the only way a UXD can be
> competitive with other UNIX solutions out there.
>
> One burning question:
>
> How much will the 1.1 to 2.1 upgrade cost the suffering 1.1 masses?
> This is one glaring ommision from the press release. Normally
> upgrade procedures are mentioned in this sort of release.
MSRP for 1.1 -> 2.1 w/ 2-user license is: US$299
1.1 -> 2.1 w/ unlimited license is: US$499
> Thanks to those inside C= who helped to make the release a
> reality. And a BIG thanks to those not working at C= anymore who
> made most of 2.x UNIX a reality.
Gee thanks <blush>.
> Hopefully, C= will make a turn around in UNIX now.
We'll certainly try.
> The $995 and $1195 ARE great prices for SVR4, however I'm
> not so sure the Amiga community in general can afford this. Hopefully
> enough VAR's, probably in Europe, can make turnkey solutions to
> help increase the volume and reduce the price.
Remember, those are *suggested* list. Actual prices will probably be lower.
And there are companies who have approached us requesting VAR status. But
of course, I can't talk about that in any detail.
DavidM
David Miller
> Hey! We _ARE_ the dealers (the last in Denver, CO) and we have _NO_
> information at all... Geez, lets get with it.
The information was shipped on Tuesday and we allowed 3 days for snail mail
propagation. Perhaps that was a tad optimistic.
> Between you guys and Newtek's fumbling we should just say screw it and go
> into some other line of work...
>
> At any rate, what's the deal with 2.1... What does it do differently?
>
> > [a UX system...] for $4998.00.
>
> Ha! Some reduced price! It's been sold at that price for several months
> now. Still too much if you ask me. NeXT's are still cheaper, faster, and
> is more complete system-- for less!
The A3000UXD has been priced around that, but this is not a UXD. This is a
UXD (1M CHIP, 8M FAST, 200M disk) *PLUS* an A2410 (Lowell board) MSRP around a
grand *PLUS* choice of a 3070 SCSI tape drive or a 1950 monitor MSRP about $600
for either of these *PLUS* the new version of the OS.
Now, my next comment is *strictly* my personal opinion and does not reflect
the attitudes or opinions of Commodore Business Machines.
With the attitude I perceive in your posting, perhaps you should
go into some other line of work. If you'd rather sell NeXTs, then
go and do it. I don't believe anyone is holding a gun to your head
forcing you to sell Amigas. Jan and I have busted our humps to get
this out the door; doing most of the work evenings and weekends
without any official sanction. We did it because we beleive in the
product and we still do. The fact that you have to ask "what's the
deal with 2.1" suggests you haven't followed any of what's gone on
in this group over the last 6-9 months. The fact is that we have
one of the most solid SVR4 ports on the market. Yes, the 386 vendors
carried a listing for SVR4 months before we did. However, did you
ever try using one of these? I haven't spoken to anyone who has been
willing to commit to their SVR4/i386 port being ready for end users.
In the future, please try to read postings completely before responding
and try resolve problems with Commodore by contacting Commodore rather
than flaming on the net. The people who make the decisions and who
set the prices DON'T READ NETNEWS! They'll never hear your gripes;
*your* potential customers will. If I was an ordinary Joe Netnews
Reader, I'd probably have 2 reactions to your posting:
1) Hmm, maybe I should stay away from the Amiga,
2) Hmm, maybe I should avoid that dealer. He obviously doesn't
think highly of the machine he claims to sell. So why is he
selling it?
Again, these are *strictly* my *PERSONAL* opinions and *NOT* those of
Commodore Business Machines, its management or anyone onther than me.
Sorry if I sound bitchy, but you hit a sore spot with me and now I've got
a cold that's making me grumpy.
DavidM
--
DavidM CATS - Commodore Applications and Technical Support
+1 215 431 9425 dav...@cbmvax.commodore.com
"Commodore Amiga 3000UX - Born to Run UNIX SVR4"
Markus Wild
>rhe...@ub.d.umn.edu (Rob Healey) writes:
>> How much will the 1.1 to 2.1 upgrade cost the suffering 1.1 masses?
>> This is one glaring ommision from the press release. Normally
>> upgrade procedures are mentioned in this sort of release.
>
>MSRP for 1.1 -> 2.1 w/ 2-user license is: US$299
> 1.1 -> 2.1 w/ unlimited license is: US$499
Oops.. so there must be a difference between the 2.03 that is now distributed
in Europe, and your 2.1?? Could you spell out some of the differences ? I'm
asking this because the 1.1->2.03 upgrade (2-user) is FREE over here, you
just mail in your old media, and get the 2.03 set (incl docs) sent back
from Commodore. Since there is a substantial difference between free and $299,
what are you offering to your 2.1 customers that 2.03 customers don't get??
-Markus
--
Markus M. Wild - wi...@nessie.cs.id.ethz.ch | wi...@amiga.physik.unizh.ch
Q: How many IBM cpu's does it take to do a logical right shift?
A: 33. 1 to hold the bits and 32 to push the register.
Chris Hanson
>> Hey! We _ARE_ the dealers (the last in Denver, CO) and we have _NO_
>> information at all... Geez, lets get with it.
To add some info, David and I both work for The Computer Room in Aurora,
Colorado. Suffice it to say, as David Miller said it so well, these are OUR
opinions. Read my .sig for a real disclaimer. ;)
>The information was shipped on Tuesday and we allowed 3 days for snail mail
>propagation. Perhaps that was a tad optimistic.
Perhaps it was. It would be nice if our Commodore marketing reps were
informed of this. We regularly talk to them, and they should at least be
able to confirm or deny this.
>> Ha! Some reduced price! It's been sold at that price for several months
>> now. Still too much if you ask me. NeXT's are still cheaper, faster, and
>> is more complete system-- for less!
>The A3000UXD has been priced around that, but this is not a UXD. This is a
>UXD (1M CHIP, 8M FAST, 200M disk) *PLUS* an A2410 (Lowell board) MSRP around a
>grand *PLUS* choice of a 3070 SCSI tape drive or a 1950 monitor MSRP about $600
>for either of these *PLUS* the new version of the OS.
Erm, incorrect. We've sold a handful of the A3000UXG packages at the $4995
package price since it was made available to us in early... January I believe.
These UXG packages, as you mentioned, have included the 2410 board, and
either a 1950 monitor or 3090 tape drive. Since the 1950 monitor is relatively
expensive for an 800x600 multiscan monitor, most of our customers have gone
with the tape drive.
>Now, my next comment is *strictly* my personal opinion and does not reflect
>the attitudes or opinions of Commodore Business Machines.
> With the attitude I perceive in your posting, perhaps you should
> go into some other line of work. If you'd rather sell NeXTs, then
> go and do it. I don't believe anyone is holding a gun to your head
> forcing you to sell Amigas.
Correct. We sell and use Amigas because we like them. We have used and sold
various Unix systems for a long time, both PC and Amiga. It just hurts to have
Commodore slam a door in their (and our) faces. The Amiga 3000UX systems were
introduced at a price that was not really within the range of other Unix-
based systems of equal power. The price has recently been lowered, but
recent systems introduced by Sun, Next and HP still make the 030-based Amiga
UX systems underpowered and overpriced compared to their competitors.
It also looks bad when a beta system is reviewed by major Unix workstation
magazines, graded very badly, though somewhat inaccurately, and allowed to
stand. I saw no letter to the editor from Commodore disputing the figures
or comparisons shown.
> Jan and I have busted our humps to get
> this out the door; doing most of the work evenings and weekends
> without any official sanction. We did it because we beleive in the
> product and we still do. The fact that you have to ask "what's the
> deal with 2.1" suggests you haven't followed any of what's gone on
> in this group over the last 6-9 months.
I follow this group more than David (Kessner) does, and I have followed
the proposed additions to 1.1. None of these were ever mentioned as being
official announcements, and we're just asking for details as to what
actually made it into the 2.1 release, and exactly what the difference
between the 2.03 and 2.1 releases are.
It also isn't very reassuring to attend DevCon (as I did) and find that
the only Unix-related topics are cancelled. I believe in your belief in the
product, but can anyone else? Any already registered developers can't have
been very happy about the DevCon mess, and Commodore's no-show at UniForum
after signing up for attendence can't have reassured the industry in
general. Does anyone take Atari's Unix project seriously anymore? (I know,
low blow.)
> The fact is that we have
> one of the most solid SVR4 ports on the market.
Yes, perhaps with 2.1. Having to demonstrate a 1.1 (and before that, Beta
3j) system that can cause a Kernal panic while using the serial port, has
an extremely slow X server (in either native monochrome or TIGA 8-bit modes)
and that flickered oddly, and crashed while attempting to start several of
the included X/Ol demos (olpixmap for one) is ugly. Unix clients who are
interested in dropping $5000+ on a system want something they can rely on.
Having to unplug and replug your multiscan monitor when switching between
the text console and the TIGA X was pretty klunky too.
Note: I understand that all of these problems have been adressed with a
revised serial port driver, better X server, 1950_kludge, null_kludge, the
Xdm, and dropping the ULowell board in favor of the DMI Resolver.
> Yes, the 386 vendors
> carried a listing for SVR4 months before we did. However, did you
> ever try using one of these? I haven't spoken to anyone who has been
> willing to commit to their SVR4/i386 port being ready for end users.
We weren't specifically referring to 386-based Unixes, though they are
much of the competition to Amiga Unix machines. But inexpensive 80x86
computers have long been the bane of Amiga computers. Clones 'n all. But
Sun Solaris machines are SVR4 too.
> In the future, please try to read postings completely before responding
> and try resolve problems with Commodore by contacting Commodore rather
> than flaming on the net. The people who make the decisions and who
> set the prices DON'T READ NETNEWS! They'll never hear your gripes;
> *your* potential customers will.
I know, I know. But it seems impossible to contact anyone who actually
has any control or say in the Unix project. "What Unix project?" is perhaps
the best reply I've gotten.
If I was an ordinary Joe Netnews
> Reader, I'd probably have 2 reactions to your posting:
> 1) Hmm, maybe I should stay away from the Amiga,
> 2) Hmm, maybe I should avoid that dealer. He obviously doesn't
> think highly of the machine he claims to sell. So why is he
> selling it?
Hmm. Perhaps. But if it had not been said by us, someone else would have
brought it up. Why do we sell the Amiga Unix systems? There are those who
want both Amiga and Unix in one system. It is perfect for them. But standing
against a pure Unix system it seems a bit shaky. And I do _not_ sell used
cars. Our customers deserve to know both the long AND short of the computer
they buy. It hurts both customer, dealer, and manufacturer when a system
is sold trying to be something it isn't.
>Again, these are *strictly* my *PERSONAL* opinions and *NOT* those of
>Commodore Business Machines, its management or anyone onther than me.
>
>Sorry if I sound bitchy, but you hit a sore spot with me and now I've got
>a cold that's making me grumpy.
Sorry if we sound a bit defensive (or offensive) but you hit a sore spot
with US. It really is hard being an Amiga dealer these days with Commodore
shooting themselves in the foot every other step, and ourselves getting
hit by the shrapnel. (The recent system and component price INCREASES for
example, in a market of DECREASING prices. Go compare an A3000/16-50 against
a Mac Classic II sometime. Yeah, I know the Mac is Monochrome at that price,
but the 3000 doesn't include a monitor at that price. ;)
>DavidM CATS - Commodore Applications and Technical Support
>+1 215 431 9425 dav...@cbmvax.commodore.com
> "Commodore Amiga 3000UX - Born to Run UNIX SVR4"
It _is_ good to know that there's SOMEBODY left there. And we do appreciate
the effort that went into the 2.1 package. But like our good Gov Roy Romer,
I guess we Colorado dudes can't let a smarmy but one-sided announcement stand
without taking a shot from the other side. ;)
Chris - Xenon
--
ch...@kessner.denver.co.us (Chris_Hanson || Lord_Xenon || Kelson_Haldane)
Home: (303)762-0849, Work: (303) 696-8973, Flames: 1-976-DEV-NULL
"The mode is the magik." -Xen
I've nothing to disclaim, since I'm not ON my employer's machine(s).
Rob Healey
|> Hey! We _ARE_ the dealers (the last in Denver, CO) and we have _NO_
|> information at all... Geez, lets get with it.
|> Between you guys and Newtek's fumbling we should just say screw it and go
|> into some other line of work...
|>
much. If your a dealer then bitch at your normal C= channel, that
SHOULD do more good than picking on Jan.
|> At any rate, what's the deal with 2.1... What does it do differently?
|>
Just about EVERYTHING. It all works, is as fast as an '030
can be expected to do thing an OODLES of USENET/PD/GNU goodies
come with it. It's on par with the current SVR4 offerings from
the Intel camp and the list price is about the same too.
|> > [a UX system...] for $4998.00.
|> Ha! Some reduced price! It's been sold at that price for several months
|> now. Still too much if you ask me. NeXT's are still cheaper, faster, and
|> is more complete system-- for less!
|>
The UXB was priced at this level. The $5k machine being offered till
April 30th is a UXD. A UXD has 8M of fast to a UXB's 4M, it has
200M of disk to the UXB's 100M and you get an monitor or tape
drive which wasn't in either the UXB or UXD package although it
should have been.
-Rob
Keith Barrett
I'm also wondering if there is be any special offering for those systems
still under GOLD SERVICE contract?
--
Keith Barrett
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Statements expressed are solely mine | Internet: bar...@pamsrc.enet.dec.com
and do not represent any employer. | UUCP: ...!decwrl!pamsrc.enet!barrett
// "My life is my own!" -The Prisoner| DDN: barrett%pamsr...@decwrl.dec.com
\X/ Amiga 3000UXD: The Next Generation| Digital Equipment Corp./DECmessageQ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Healey
>propagation. Perhaps that was a tad optimistic.
>
should have faxed something to all the dealers rather than relying
on US Snail.
>The A3000UXD has been priced around that, but this is not a UXD. This is a
>UXD (1M CHIP, 8M FAST, 200M disk) *PLUS* an A2410 (Lowell board) MSRP around a
>grand *PLUS* choice of a 3070 SCSI tape drive or a 1950 monitor MSRP about $600
>for either of these *PLUS* the new version of the OS.
>
I paid over $6k for less of a system a year ago, sigh... But
then I had a year of fun and excitment I wouldn't otherwise of had...
Dave has zero to do with pricing but let's hope this offer is
sucessful enough that it pays for C= to keep the $5k price AND
make BOTH the tape and the monitor part of the deal. An '030
is at a market disadvantage much as a 386 is vs RISC and 486. They
NEED sweetened deals like this to move '030 based systems until
the '040 versions come out whenever.
>Now, my next comment is *strictly* my personal opinion and does not reflect
>the attitudes or opinions of Commodore Business Machines.
>
I agree with most of what is said here, if you CAN'T bring yourself
to support a product then make room for someone who can. This is
aimed at the Colorado Dave by the way. Dave Miller is a STRONG
Amiga believer or he wouldn't have taken 1/100 the crap he's
had too.
= With the attitude I perceive in your posting, perhaps you should
= go into some other line of work. If you'd rather sell NeXTs, then
= go and do it. I don't believe anyone is holding a gun to your head
= forcing you to sell Amigas. Jan and I have busted our humps to get
= this out the door; doing most of the work evenings and weekends
= without any official sanction. We did it because we beleive in the
= product and we still do. The fact that you have to ask "what's the
= deal with 2.1" suggests you haven't followed any of what's gone on
= in this group over the last 6-9 months. The fact is that we have
= one of the most solid SVR4 ports on the market. Yes, the 386 vendors
= carried a listing for SVR4 months before we did. However, did you
= ever try using one of these? I haven't spoken to anyone who has been
= willing to commit to their SVR4/i386 port being ready for end users.
When you compare AmigaUNIX 2.1 and DELL UNIX SVR4, the best and
most fixed Intel version, they run the same speed on hardware in
the same class, '030 vs 386, and have the same features. DELL
has DOS Merge, Motif and X.desktop bundled in and most of
the GNU software as well as popular USENET code. AmigaUNIX has
FULLY FUCNTIONAL versions of gcc and g++ and the GNU crew as
well as popular USENET code. Both systems have SLIP, both systems
have lot's of X contrib clients and both run X11R4 with X11R5
ports working fairly well already. 2 user versions of both go
for $999 MSLP, AmigaUNIX unlimited goes for $1195, DELL $1295.
AmigaUNIX and DELL are the ONLY two SVR4's that are end user ready.
The other vendor's have mearly REPACKAGED the buggy USL Intel code.
Most are dragging their feet till the Solaris 2.0 release which
is Sun's baby. Sun want's to sell SPARC's so how stable do you
suppose their Intel based Solaris 2.0 is going to be?...
The TRUTH of the matter is 1.1 AmigaUNIX was MORE stable than the
Intel SVR4's offered in the same time frame, last April. If the
serial port had worked it would have ALOT more stable than the
others, pretty sad commentary. A 2232 at least made 1.1 stable,
there was no way to stablize the early Intel versions.
Considering what's happened to AmigaUNIX in the last 6 months it's
simply AMAZING that it's at the level it is.
I would ask the Dave in Colorado to compare Intel SVR4's and 2.1
and THEN complain. At least then you'll know of what you speak...
= In the future, please try to read postings completely before responding
= and try resolve problems with Commodore by contacting Commodore rather
= than flaming on the net. The people who make the decisions and who
= set the prices DON'T READ NETNEWS! They'll never hear your gripes;
= *your* potential customers will. If I was an ordinary Joe Netnews
= Reader, I'd probably have 2 reactions to your posting:
= 1) Hmm, maybe I should stay away from the Amiga,
= 2) Hmm, maybe I should avoid that dealer. He obviously doesn't
= think highly of the machine he claims to sell. So why is he
= selling it?
=
C= Dave makes some good points here. If you're a dealer then
you have someone at C= your SUPPOSED to be able to scream at.
SCREAM AT THEM! And if they don't listen SCREAM AT THEIR BOSS,
keep SCREAMING up the tree till someone listens and fixes things.
Make C= sales and marketing EARN their money like R&D does! Don't
let them slouch. You're a C= dealer, DEMAND the service from C=
you DESERVE. Dave or Jan can't do squat, they're not even in the same
area let alone dept. Go after your reps, they're the ones that deserve
your heat, not us, not Dave or Jan.
>Sorry if I sound bitchy, but you hit a sore spot with me and now I've got
>a cold that's making me grumpy.
>
Oh oh, new USENET flame excuse? B^). Have I started a fad? B^).
I still have lingering traces of the grouch inducing cold so I'll
blame any AR tendencys in this article on it too! B^).
-Rob
Guenther Grau
I am a great fan of Amiga and of Unix, so I think I can understand your
enthusiasm in your work. Therefore I personally want to thank you for the
work you did and will do to support the combination of Amiga and Unix.
And I do think that many Amiga-user out in the world will profit from your
work and feel the same way I do.
I apologize that this is a very emotional opinion, but I just felt that I
was forced to write this. Please feel free to comment on that.
--
Guenther Grau, student of computer science at the University of Karlsruhe
in germany
s_g...@iravcl.ira.uka.de
uk...@dkauni2.bitnet
uk...@ibm3090.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de
uk...@ibm3090.rz.uni-karlsruhe.dbp.de
David Kessner
>In article <64...@amix.commodore.com> dav...@amix.commodore.com (David Miller) writes:
>>The information was shipped on Tuesday and we allowed 3 days for snail mail
>>propagation. Perhaps that was a tad optimistic.
Optimistic, yes. It is Tuesday evening but we still have not recieved
information. Oh well.
> I would ask the Dave in Colorado to compare Intel SVR4's and 2.1
> and THEN complain. At least then you'll know of what you speak...
I have been using SysVr3.2 on my 386, and know several folks running ESIX
SysVr4. In general, I agree with your comments. I however must point out
that I never compared Amiga UNIX with SysVr4 on an Intel machine. IMHO, this
is not an option. What I am comparing it to is the lower priced NeXT's and
Sun's. True, they are a little more expensive (by about $1000) than the
3000UXG, but their features more than make up for this.
> C= Dave makes some good points here. If you're a dealer then
> you have someone at C= your SUPPOSED to be able to scream at.
> SCREAM AT THEM! And if they don't listen SCREAM AT THEIR BOSS,
> keep SCREAMING up the tree till someone listens and fixes things.
We are screaming at all of them, and are still not getting anywhere. Sometimes
it helps, mostly it does not. In reguard to this v2.1 thing, we are waiting
to see how long it takes C='s normal channels to get this informaion to us
without us yelling. One week and counting...
> Make C= sales and marketing EARN their money like R&D does!
Commodore Sales and Marketing should not make money until their dealers
do. For every dealer that goes out of business, due to a shrinking market or
other stupid things, there should be one marketing guy fired-- Ok, not
litteraly, but you get the idea. It's a sad day when a town of 3 million
people cannot support two Amiga Dealers.
> Dave or Jan can't do squat...
Yes, I know that. However, complaining to the reps is not doing much either.
Complaining to the Net (and Dave, although he really isn't the target here)
hopefully will stur things up enough to get C= off their duff, or make this
lengthy death go a little quicker. Either way, it's fine by me.
D.J.Walker-Morgan
|> AmigaUNIX and DELL are the ONLY two SVR4's that are end user ready.
|> The other vendor's have mearly REPACKAGED the buggy USL Intel code.
|> Most are dragging their feet till the Solaris 2.0 release which
|> is Sun's baby. Sun want's to sell SPARC's so how stable do you
|> suppose their Intel based Solaris 2.0 is going to be?...
SunSoft are the people who sell Solaris 2.0. They get no income from SPARC
sales as such, since Sun devolved into seperate units (SMCC, the hardware makers then buy Solaris from SunSoft, the OS makers). With people like Dell on SunSofts
customer list, it is imperative for them that it be stable, though expect
the supported hardware list to be fairly narrow, aiming for an Intel box with
a comprable spec to a low-end SPARC workstation. Suggesting that they make the
Intel version unstable to sell more SPARCs is silly.
--
============================================================================
d...@micromuse.co.uk |"In a perfect world we'd all sing in tune
Voice +44-71-352-7774 | but this is reality so give some room"
Fax +44-71-351-7834 | (Sir) William Bragg
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Non-standard Disclaimer : "I didn't do it, it wasn't me, I wasn't there"
Mark Rickan
>Note: I understand that all of these problems have been adressed with a
>revised serial port driver, better X server, 1950_kludge, null_kludge, the
>Xdm, and dropping the ULowell board in favor of the DMI Resolver.
This is rather tangential to the rest of your comments, but has Commodore
officially abandoned the A2410 in favour of the DMI Resolver? If so, which
board is included as part of the UX system?
Just curious,
Mark
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mark Rickan ...!uunet!utai!utgpu!maccs!rickan -
- DCSS, McMaster University ric...@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca -
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
et...@levels.unisa.edu.au
>
> COMMODORE (R) PUTS POWER OF UNIX WITHIN MORE AMIGA USERS' REACH
>
> Version 2.1 of UNIX SVR4 (R) Introduced
>
> Now Available at 40% Price Reduction
> ------------------------------------
>
What specifically are the diferences between 2.03 and 2.1?
(I still haven't received my 2.03 upgrade yet :-( )
And where is the native colour X server that was promised in
an anouncement nearly a year ago. I'd be happier with a limited-colour
X server for the Amiga's chip set, than having to use two monitors and
the 2410 to get 8-bit colour.
Andrew Chalmers
University of South Australia
et...@levels.unisa.edu.au
an...@audrey.levels.unisa.edu.au
Scott Lurndal
|> AmigaUNIX and DELL are the ONLY two SVR4's that are end user ready.
|> The other vendor's have mearly REPACKAGED the buggy USL Intel code.
|> Most are dragging their feet till the Solaris 2.0 release which
|> is Sun's baby. Sun want's to sell SPARC's so how stable do you
|> suppose their Intel based Solaris 2.0 is going to be?...
|>
I cannot let this fly by without disputing it. Unisys has had a stable SVR4
system shipping on the Motorola MC88100 chip for almost a year now. The
Operating System, is, in truth, more than just a port as it is built
around the Chorus* microkernel, yet provides full SVR4.0 source compatibility
to user programs (with 88open BCS and OCS compliance thrown in, and
88open ABI compliance pending certification). [and functional UFS!]
Look for papers at upcoming workshops.
[ps. Sun doesn't make or sell Solaris, SUNSoft does; their objective
is to sell software, not hardware. And they do employ professionals
who presumably take pride in their work.]
Disclaimer: All above is IMHO.
[* Chorus is a trademark of Chorus syst`emes]
scott lurndal
Rob Healey
>(I still haven't received my 2.03 upgrade yet :-( )
>
you have to get 2.1 like us yanks?
> And where is the native colour X server that was promised in
>an anouncement nearly a year ago. I'd be happier with a limited-colour
>X server for the Amiga's chip set, than having to use two monitors and
>the 2410 to get 8-bit colour.
>
Personally, I'd spend a little extra and get the DMI resolver
board over the 2410. More expandable and capable card. I
hear X11R5 runs pretty well on it too.
-Rob
Bruce Janson
>>(I still haven't received my 2.03 upgrade yet :-( )
>>
> Will you guys down under get the 2.03 version or will
> you have to get 2.1 like us yanks?
Our official 2.03 distribution cartridge, floppies and a
small amount of upgrade documentation arrived a few days ago.
Cheers,
bruce.
Bruce Janson Email: br...@cs.su.oz.au
Basser Department of Computer Science Phone: +61-2-692-3423
University of Sydney, N.S.W., 2006, AUSTRALIA Fax: +61-2-692-3838
Maurice J. LeBrun
One thing I saw omitted from the article is whether Amiga Unix 2.1 will run
on an '040 board. Since it wasn't mentioned, I guess we have to assume it
won't :-(.
Anybody have any information either way?
Maurice LeBrun m...@fusion.ph.utexas.edu
Institute for Fusion Studies, University of Texas at Austin
Don Phillips
Path: blkhole!ncr-sd!sdd.hp.com!wupost!uunet!cbmvax!amix!davidm
From: dav...@amix.commodore.com (David Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Date: 17 Feb 92 15:13:25 GMT
References: <1992Feb15....@kessner.denver.co.us>
Organization: Commodore-Amiga Unix Development
Lines: 61
da...@kessner.denver.co.us (David Kessner) writes:
> Hey! We _ARE_ the dealers (the last in Denver, CO) and we have _NO_
> information at all... Geez, lets get with it.
The information was shipped on Tuesday [11 February] and we allowed 3 days for snail mail
propagation. Perhaps that was a tad optimistic.
Just another data point. As of today (24 February), neither the
dealer in Los Angeles, nor the local dealer in San Diego has received
any information about the upgrade.
Has anybody received any information/(upgrade :-) via a dealer yet?
--
Don Phillips d...@blkhole.resun.com or don%blkhole....@nosc.mil
Research Unlimited or ...!ncr-sd!blkhole!don
Escondido, Calif. My opinions are just that, and no more.
Guess who?
that they had received official notice from CBM about the V2.1
upgrade. I assume they'll upgrade their UXG to V2.1. (From V1.1)
--
-------------- Why does it happen? Because it happens. -------------
---------------------------------------------- -- RUSH -------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
David Kessner
>My local dealer (Digital Arts, in Bloomington, Indiana) informed me
>that they had received official notice from CBM about the V2.1
>upgrade. I assume they'll upgrade their UXG to V2.1. (From V1.1)
Our store in Denver recieved their v2.1 information today, Feb 25'th. What
does that make it, only two weeks after it was "shipped"?
This packet that we recieved informed us of _NOTHING_ about v2.1 other than
prices. Everything else we were told about from David from C= (sorry, I forgot
your last name). Some of the questions I originally posed have still gone
unanswered. Perhapse someone from C= would be so kind as to tell me what's
up...
1. Does 2.1 support the 68040? If not, WHY?
2. Does X utilize the 34010 on the UofL or DMI board for more than
a damn expensive fram buffer (ie, does X run _ON_ the 34010 yet)?
3. Are the bugs in the Open-Look Demo's fixed (as in, not dump core)?
4. Is there a one-monitor solution for those who use both X on a UofL
and text mode "virtual terminals"?
5. Is mtools included (the utility that allows you to read/write
MS-DOS floppies), like Sun, NeXT and others do?
I'm sure there is more, but these are the ones I remember off of the
top of my head...
Sean Landis
As of 27 Feb, our dealer is aware of the announcement but has yet to receive
any info from Commodore. He said that if I sent back my registration, that
I should hear from them directly. Any private owners out there hear from
Commodore yet?
Sean
--
Sean C. Landis | {cs.utah.edu, hpda, sun, uplherc}!unislc!scl
Unisys Open Systems Group | s...@unislc.slc.unisys.com
320 North 2200 West B2D01 | (801) 594-3988
Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 | (801) 594-3827 Fax
(Mark D. Manes), Norfolk State University
> In article <64...@amix.commodore.com> dav...@amix.commodore.com (David Miller) writes:
>
> Has anybody received any information/(upgrade :-) via a dealer yet?
Yep. My dealership has. Video Computer Resources in Chesapeake Virginia.
> --
> Don Phillips d...@blkhole.resun.com or don%blkhole....@nosc.mil
> Research Unlimited or ...!ncr-sd!blkhole!don
> Escondido, Calif. My opinions are just that, and no more.
-mark=
ma...@vger.nsu.edu
"CDTV - It is an Amiga... check out my painted keyboard!"
Rick Flower
>In article <64...@amix.commodore.com> dav...@amix.commodore.com (David Miller) writes:
>
> Path: blkhole!ncr-sd!sdd.hp.com!wupost!uunet!cbmvax!amix!davidm
> From: dav...@amix.commodore.com (David Miller)
> Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
> Date: 17 Feb 92 15:13:25 GMT
> References: <1992Feb15....@kessner.denver.co.us>
> Organization: Commodore-Amiga Unix Development
> Lines: 61
>
> da...@kessner.denver.co.us (David Kessner) writes:
> > Hey! We _ARE_ the dealers (the last in Denver, CO) and we have _NO_
> > information at all... Geez, lets get with it.
>
> The information was shipped on Tuesday [11 February] and we allowed 3 days for snail mail
> propagation. Perhaps that was a tad optimistic.
>
>Just another data point. As of today (24 February), neither the
>dealer in Los Angeles, nor the local dealer in San Diego has received
>any information about the upgrade.
>
I spoke with Mike (in sales) at Creative Computers, and he knew about
the new release last week (a few days after I read the release here!)..
However, I did find someone there tonight that had no idea..
>Has anybody received any information/(upgrade :-) via a dealer yet?
>--
> Don Phillips d...@blkhole.resun.com or don%blkhole....@nosc.mil
> Research Unlimited or ...!ncr-sd!blkhole!don
> Escondido, Calif. My opinions are just that, and no more.
-- Rick
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Support SANE -- Snails Against Nuclear Energy.. | |
+------------------------------------------------------+----------------------+
| UUCP : {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!theweav!rickf | /// Amiga: A |
| ARPA : crash!theweav!ri...@nosc.mil | /// TeX Above |
| INET : ri...@theweav.cts.com | \\\/// The Rest... |
| SNAIL: P.O. Box 3907, Torrance, Ca 90510 | \XX/ |
+------------------------------------------------------+----------------------+
Frank Crash Edwards
Nope. Why? Because it was never begun. Remember, CBM doesn't have an '040
board yet, right? Who does? PP&S and GVP. Shouldn't they be the ones to
port the code? Actually, David Miller has been working on the changes (on
his own time, not C='s) for an 040 implementation. Major kudos to David
for this work.
> 2. Does X utilize the 34010 on the UofL or DMI board for more than
> a damn expensive fram buffer (ie, does X run _ON_ the 34010 yet)?
Not the stock version that's on the tape. No further comment on this. It's
interesting that you mention this; read the notes on the X server in the MIT
release for a few mumblings from various people saying that it's not worth
the effort. Doesn't make any sense to me -- there *should* be a worthwhile
speed increase, but I really don't know much about the server's internals.
> 3. Are the bugs in the Open-Look Demo's fixed (as in, not dump core)?
Who cares?
> 4. Is there a one-monitor solution for those who use both X on a UofL
> and text mode "virtual terminals"?
Yes, get a Y connector for the VGA port. For a few extra bucks you can get
an intelligent one that autosenses the source signal and routes it to the
monitor.
> 5. Is mtools included (the utility that allows you to read/write
> MS-DOS floppies), like Sun, NeXT and others do?
Sun and others include them on the release tape? I don't believe that.
Although I know that for a fee Sun will put a third party code on the
CDROM they use for distribution.
If you want a copy, it's online at decwrl.dec.com; and the only changes
were in the device name assignments. See my previous postings on that
topic, or send me email and I'll send you a copy of "devices.c"
> I'm sure there is more, but these are the ones I remember off of the
> top of my head...
You didn't ask about:
ExaByte support (no)
CDROM support (no)
PostScript printer support (yes)
Device independent troff (no, but groff is included)
>--
>David Kessner - da...@kessner.denver.co.us Reunite Pangea!
--
Frank J. Edwards, Owner Edwards & Edwards Consulting, Unix / AmigaDOS
2677 Arjay Court Email: crash%ckc...@myrddin.sybus.com
Palm Harbor, FL 34684-4505 Voice: (813) 786-3675
Hi! I'm a .signature anit-body. Copy me into your .sig to protect yourself!
Rob Healey
>SunSoft are the people who sell Solaris 2.0. They get no income from SPARC
>sales as such, since Sun devolved into seperate units (SMCC, the hardware
>makers then buy Solaris from SunSoft, the OS makers). With people like Dell
>on SunSofts customer list, it is imperative for them that it be stable, though
>expect the supported hardware list to be fairly narrow, aiming for an Intel
>box with a comprable spec to a low-end SPARC workstation. Suggesting that they
>make the Intel version unstable to sell more SPARCs is silly.
>
Call me silly but answer these questions:
1) What makes the parent company more money, SPARC sales, where
they get income from hardware, software, support, peripherals,
etc or Intel Solaris where they get income from software alone?
2) SunSoft has limited resources. What do you think they will spend
more resources on? The OS that sells with the hardware that
makes the parent company more money or the OS that will make
SunSoft a little money? Which OS do you think the PARENT
company will tell them to give priority to, either overtly or
covertly?
3) What do you think Sun will say to it's 386i owners, hardware SUN
itself produced, if they want Solaris? Sun's track record with Intel
based products is somewhat less than Rosey.
4) SPARC hardware is in DIRECT competition with Intel hardware needed
to run Solaris 2.0, or did you think Solaris will run on the
low end Korean clone jobbys. How warm do you think the PARENT
company will be to the idea of helping out the competition?
5) How much resources on a clone do you think you need to run
Solaris which includes all of SVR4 plus OpenWindows plus CD-ROM
applications plus other classic SunOS baggage? What do you think the
price for this will be vs a SPARCstation running Solaris? Close
enough to be in the same price range for similar capabilitys?
Competition?
The parent company makes a little off an Intel Solaris 2.0 sale,
they make LOTS off a SPARCstation+Solaris 2.0+support+peripheral
sales. Where do you suppose the big push and most of the
resources are going to go toward?
-Rob
p.s.
We should probably take this to email since it doesn't really relate
much to AmigaUNIX now.
Don Phillips
I spoke with Mike (in sales) at Creative Computers, and he knew about
the new release last week (a few days after I read the release here!)..
However, I did find someone there tonight that had no idea..
I received a call back from Creative Computers on 2 March. They
reported that 2.1 won't be shipping until "the end of the month". I
followed this up with a call to Commodore, who gave me the same story.
From what I can gather, the information that was provided to the
dealers was mearly an annoucement of 2.1, without any firm commitment
to ship dates. Can anybody who has more information about the
announcement provide some clarification as to what the real status is?
Thanks,