From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9a5f3bd162009c01
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!koehntopp.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!195.92.193.196.MISMATCH!nntp.theplanet.net!inewsm1.nntp.theplanet.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!mutlu.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT GPL 2005: Too clever by half?
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 22:17:00 +0100
Organization: Pushface
Message-ID: <m2br2choz7.fsf@grendel.local>
References: <70e0e$4331acfc$4995583$14979@ALLTEL.NET>
 <87hdcew7wq.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <1127511077.919641.107390@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <sa4vf0rnfjj.fsf@snoopy.microcomaustralia.com.au>
 <tIcZe.3304$vw6.3158@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>
 <43357152$0$16476$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
 <m2mzm2i934.fsf@grendel.local>
 <4335bc15$0$26227$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
 <wvbrmzly25ev.fsf@sun.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1127942219 8708 62.49.19.209 (28 Sep 2005 21:16:59
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 21:16:59 +0000 (UTC)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:eaCmxRxFK/8W6ZcwltldflAMjBI=
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (darwin)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5256
Date: 2005-09-28T22:17:00+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen <ole-hjalmar.kristensen@substitute_employer_here.com> writes:

>     GB> Simon Wright wrote:
>     >> It certainly seems to be true that, no matter how daft you or I might
>     >> think it, management would prefer to use Windows to develop on.

> You can run Solaris on almost any Intel box as well....

It's the cost of the outsourced support (often more per year than the
cost of the hardware), and the management effort that would be
necessary to beat the outsource supplier down to a sensible price per
seat.

You and I know that Solaris is going to be less trouble to support,
but lack of familiarity breeds fear.

Last time I looked, Solaris was rather picky about the hardware it ran
on .. has that changed?