Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,alt.suit.att-bsdi Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.hawaii.edu!ames!agate!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!umeecs!gip.eecs.umich.edu!dmuntz From: dmuntz@gip.eecs.umich.edu (Dan Muntz) Subject: Re: AT&T/USL CD-ROM Review Process Message-ID: <1992Dec14.200337.2476@zip.eecs.umich.edu> Sender: news@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Mr. News) Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor References: <1992Dec13.165418.5021@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <1992Dec13.183240.23944@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> <1992Dec14.165913.6896@fcom.cc.utah.edu> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:03:37 GMT Lines: 19 In article <1992Dec14.165913.6896@fcom.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes: >it has reaped from University level research. The question remains as to >whether they are willing to trade fututre benefits for control of the >market; the answer may suprise us. > I'm not sure that they are losing anything. With full knowledge of what USL/AT&T has done, universities and reasearchers are still clamoring for Plan 9. If I attend a university with a Plan 9 source license does this mean I'll have to *live in New Jersey* if I want to do OS reasearch?! I would have liked to have seen universities refusing to use Plan 9 and joining in the lawsuit against USL. What we get instead are places like CMU dropping their BNR2SS project (net2/386bsd? replacement of AT&T code necessary to run Mach). I'll bet AT&T is running scared now. -Dan dmuntz@eecs.umich.edu