[rescue] SunOS 5.5.1 inaccessible

[Michael Schiller]

On Thursday, February 13, 2003, at 01:21 PM, Jeffrey Nonken wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 09:34:54 -0500, "Loomis, Rip" 
> <GILBERT.R.LOOMIS at saic.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I have it on good authority that the reason for the change was that
>> HP-UX was all the way up to version 10.x (with 11.x on the way), while
>> Solaris was only 2.x.  Some marketeer "perceived" that customers would
>> be more likely to buy Solaris if the version number was similar to the
>> HP-UX version number.  That would imply that Solaris was "just as 
>> good"
>> ...since obviously technical factors wouldn't be taken into account.
>
> Yep. Ever notice that Word went from version 2 directly to version 6, 
> not
> long
> after WordPerfect reached version 6? It's not the first time this has
> happened, nor will it be the last.

Well, at least they're sort of consistant, in that Solaris 2.6 then 
Solaris 7 rather than going Solaris 2.6 to Solaris 12 or some other 
number that has NO basis in anything even close to reality.

And speaking of reality, the differences between 2.6 / 2.7 / 2.8 / 2.9 
are really more than a . revision, so calling them 7 8 and 9 is 
probably closer to reality then the 2.x numbering was. (IMHO)

-Mike
*-------------------------------------------------------------------*
* PGP fingerprint= D2 4F A8 B7 13 D5 73 1E  48 99 40 99 F9 BC 74 74 *
* Email:schiller at nospam.agrijag.com \|||/    http://www.agrijag.com *
*                                   (o o)                           *
*--------------------------------ooO-(_)-Ooo------------------------*