Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!mcnc!decvax!wivax!cadmus!harvard!seismo!hao!hplabs!sri-unix!kermit@BRL-VGR.ARPA From: kermit@BRL-VGR.ARPA Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: eagle Message-ID: <12350@sri-arpa.UUCP> Date: Mon, 24-Sep-84 22:57:08 EDT Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.12350 Posted: Mon Sep 24 22:57:08 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 29-Sep-84 10:33:38 EDT Lines: 26 From: Chuck KennedyProbably the greatest positive aspect of changing your controller from the Unibus to a CMI adapter is the decreased load on your Unibus If all you have on the Unibus is a few terminal multiplexors (DHs or what have you), it might not be worth it. On the other hand, if you have some heavy duty I/O hogs on the Unibus (such as some graphics devices like Ikonases or Megateks), it might be worthwhile to consider changing over to the CMI interface. Also, just to provide a counterpoint to Phil Ngai's comments about the 9900 controllers, we've had very good luck with them here. In fact, just a few months back I unpacked a couple of 9900 controllers and two Eagles, plugged them in and they ran and are still running just great! We have many older 9400 controllers as well. Our experience with the 9400 CMI adapters has been excellent. We have four CMI adapters on our two 750s and they've run for two years now with no problembs after a one day installation job. I guess it just goes to show you can get good and bad opinions about almost anything (just ask our maintenance guys about Emulex). -Chuck Kennedy U.S. Army Ballistic Research Lab Arpanet: Kermit @ BRL UUCP: ...!{decvax,cbosgd}!brl-bmd!kermit