Found the post below as well as some other posts but that did not
answer my question.

Is there a way to tell from the code if Mentor-Pro 4.0 based on OA,
rather than on R83?

What I remember, ADDS sued Pick Systems because it believed to be
entitled, under its license with Pick, to upgrade from R83 to OA.
Supposedly Pick Systems went to AP to cut-off the upgrade agreement in
the ADDS license. Thus it seems that ADDS had the rights to OA and
would have based Mento-Pro on OA, rather than on R83.

Incidently, it was this incident that prompted ADDS to join with EDP to
develop what became UniVision.

Henry Keultjes
Mansfield Ohio USA
hbkeultjesateathlinkdotnet



Correct. mvEnterprise is the current name for the Sequoia Pick OA code.

Fujitsu sold their Pick business to Alpha Micro, and Alpha Micro sold
it a few
years later to GA. While they owned it, Alpha pretty much ignored the
Fujitsu
implementation and concentrated on selling the protected-mode OA
implementation
that they got when they bought Rexon. I can't remember what happened to
the
Pertec license. I know it was done by COST, the company founded by Rich
Lauer
and Tim Holland when they left Pick Systems, and that John Bramley was
an
engineer at Pertec and that's how he met Tim. But I don't know how the
Pertec
story ended. COST also did the above-mentioned Rexon port before being
acquired
by Sequoia.

Rob Allen
amateur Pick historian

I wasn't aware that ADDS had anything to do with UniVision - more the other
way around, that EDP developed UniVision to stop them having to buy licences
from ADDS....

As for your question.. no idea!!!
Simon
<csigline (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

csigline (AT) hotmail (DOT) com wrote:
If you have the source code for all three, I would think so.

If you are only looking at the object code, it would be more
difficult, but here's a clue: R83 had no "linking loader" but
OA did.

--
frosty

Obviously, not having to buy licenses was one of the motivators but I
am quite sure that ADDS and/or the high-ups at ADDS were deeply
involved in this.

So can anyone from EDP speak up; Does UniVision have the "linking
loader" that Frosty ssays is one of the distinguishing features
between R83 and OA?

Henry Keultjes
hbkeultjesatearthlinkdotnet

I know that Univision was a "white-room" development - ie didn't use any
external source code - but that it was functionally based on the ADDS MOE of
the time.

ADDS people may have been involved (I think EDP recruited some ADDS staff at
the time - though I may be wrong), but I can't see why ADDS would have
corroborated in a project that would lose them future revenues... Again, I
could be wrong.

I doubt you'll get a comment from anybody in EDP... but we can hope

Simon




<csigline (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

I was chief scientist for EDP when we (they) developed Univision - I
saw it through from start to release. Before that I worked for a few
years at ADDS in the research lab (alongside Dave Holle).

Univision was a clean-room development. It has no shared code with
anything from ADDS.

ADDS did come to visit us at one time - and even has some kind of
agreement that they would license Univision from us. Somehow, it never
came about - and by then the relationship between ADDS and EDP had
soured somewhat.

I haven't seen Univision for years now ... but I still know a few of
the folks working on it. Technically, I think it is an excellent
product - and certainly far more like Pick that any of the other clones
- and (IMHO) far easier to administer.

Certainly, it has not grabbed the large market share that U2 has -
which is a pity.