IBM to support UNIX on 4300 (why not AT&T's port)

[Paul S. R. Chisholm]

>> It would be interesting to see if that standalone
>> UNIX could be forced out of the bowels of IBM.
>
>Why not try to force the 370 Unix described in the BLTJ October 1984 issue
>"out of the bowels of" AT&T?  It claims to be "standalone", and (from the
>available public descriptions of both systems) appears to be very similar
>to what IX/370 would be "on the bare metal".
>
>One word of caution.  Those who try to force things "out of the bowels of"
>other entities should watch where they stand (:-).
							[from an IBMer]

You're telling me.  As I heard it, IBM and AT&T signed a joint agreement;
IBM would make a change to some part of their system, and AT&T would port
Unix to run on the result.  They did so, and got it up and running at
several sites.  AT&T then wanted to market the result; IBM pointed to some
fine print in the agreement and disallowed them.

I welcome rebuttles to this rumor.  Note that Unix is a trademark of AT&T
Bell Laboratories, one of several companies whose official positions on
this subject may greatly differ from the story above.
-- 
	-Paul S. R. Chisholm
	...!{pegasus,cbosgd}!lzmi!psc   The above opinions are my own,
	...!{hocsj,ihnp4}!lznv!psc      not necessarily anyone else's.