WG15 N576

	Your ref:
	Our ref:


	Mr J Isaak
	SC22/ WG15 Convenor
	Digital Equipment
	30 Porter Drive
	Littleton, MA 01460-1446
	USA						   4 May 1995


	Dear Mr Isaak,


	POSIX: WHAT IS THE FUTURE?


	Since the POSIX project began it has received the full support
	of CCTA.  We have demonstrated this support by participating in
	WG15 and also by supporting and participating in P1003.0.

	We currently recommend that users mandate conformance to 9945-1
	when procuring platforms for a multi tasking multi user
	environments.  Over the past twelve months, however, we have
	started to question the value of this advice to our customers.

	The aim of the POSIX project was to promote the concept of
	Application Portability at source code level.  How far has the
	POSIX family of standards succeeded in real applications in end-
	user businesses?  The information at our disposal suggests
	success is limited.  On the one hand, departments who have
	purchased POSIX compliant platforms have found the more detailed
	specification of XPG4 Base necessary because the 'flavour' of
	the product bought will be more consistent across a family of
	products.  Application portability has been achieved by the
	machine-specific implementations of RDBMS and similar products
	allowing application portability at the business level, but by
	the route of lock-in to a strategic software product.  It may
	not be POSIX that helps the user!

	Our customers have accumulated a heterogeneous array of systems
	and interoperability is the key requirement.  We are unaware of
	any way in which the POSIX framework is progressing this.  All
	progress seems to emerge from the market and even X/Open finds
	itself under threat from this user need.  The challenge to all
	'open systems' approaches is the success of products in the
	market in delivering increasing business benefit to the user.

	Developments such as X/Open's spec 1170, Windows NT server and
	OS/2 all of which are supported by Independent Software Vendors
	(ISV's), contrast sharply with the evasive answers ISV's give
	when POSIX compliance is mentioned.  In the case of NT it seems
	crazy to us that procurers use the fact that it has a POSIX
	interface to justify purchase when everyone knows that	they
	have no intention of demanding or using POSIX compliant
	application software that will utilise it.  We are unaware of any
	POSIX certificated Microsoft application.

	CCTA has to follow and not dictate to the market.  It seems that
	a key indicator in the market is what independent software
	vendors support.  Their priorities appear to meet customer
	requirements for performance on a range of server technologies,
	but to deliver this through the market leading desktop device.
	At present we enjoy the benefits of some competition in this
	area - rivalry between Windows 95 and OS/2 to command the future
	for instance.

	POSIX is amongst the pantheon of initiatives which set out a
	need - but much of that need has now been met.

	CCTA's view is that POSIX project is dealing with a computing
	environment on the wane.  The participants should take stock of
	the markets, of users needs and ask themselves if they are still
	aiming at the right target - we would welcome WG15's views on
	where they see the POSIX project going in the future.

	The view of CCTA's management team is that it is only prepared
	to allocate the resources for continued participation in helping
	to develop a new view to take our user policies up to the
	millenium.



	Yours sincerely




	Peter Owens
	Strategic Programmes Division