> but a lot of 70s and 80s "Unixes" don't exactly resemble what we think of as "Unix" anyway

And that's exactly why the term "early Unix" suggests "pre-SVR4". Once a platform has matured, it's not "early" anymore.

The whole thing is weirdly written. For example:

> Like many early Unix variants, Amiga Unix never became wildly popular

Except SVR4 was popular.

So they're either saying Amix was early Unix, then the GP is correct that it wasn't early Unix. Or they're saying that SVR4 was unpopular, which is also untrue.

I don't think the blurb is intending to suggest either of these points though. I'm sure people maintaining a fan site for Amix would understand their history. So I just think they've written the blurb very poorly. Poor enough that the default conclusion people are likely to draw is a technically incorrect one.