Ultrix 4.2

[Ted Lemon]

In article <3459 at geocub.UUCP>, lutmann at geocub.UUCP (Patrice LUTMANN) writes:
|> 	Is it because the MIT sample server is more efficient?
|> 	Is it because the MIT sample server is less buggy?
|> 	Or is it because DEC does not care about us? What a cheek!
And in article <1991Jun19.105814 at wsl.dec.com>, Joel Gringorten writes:
|The bottom line is that the server/driver interface was completely 
|redesigned for Ultrix 4.2 for multiscreen workstations.  The changes were 
|given to MIT and will appear in MIT R5.  Digital is one of the first
|companies to release multiscreen workstations (perhaps *the* first?)  
|We're proud of this work and it's being received quite well by our 
|customers.  

In addition to the above work that Joel mentions, allow me to point
out that a lot of the colour speedups in the R4 servers came from
Digital, and a lot of the code in the R4 release either came from
Digital, was worked on at Digital, or was funded by Digital.

There are a lot of things in our product offering that we'd like to
improve on.   I'm sure you've run into one or two of them.   However,
your assertion that we don't care about our customers is completely
untrue.

Circumstances sometimes prevent us from releasing the latest
Consortium code in sync with our code, and circumstances sometimes
prevent the Consortium from releasing our latest contributions when we
make them, but this is indicative of different release schedules, not
a lack of desire to make things right for the customer.   If we didn't
care about the customer, we wouldn't be reading this newsgroup.

			       _MelloN_