Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site baylor.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!shell!neuro1!baylor!peter From: peter@baylor.UUCP (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: Re: Re: the world is not all vaxen Message-ID: <508@baylor.UUCP> Date: Thu, 22-Aug-85 07:02:05 EDT Article-I.D.: baylor.508 Posted: Thu Aug 22 07:02:05 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 25-Aug-85 06:29:43 EDT References: <767@brl-tgr.ARPA> <488@baylor.UUCP> <562@neuro1.UUCP> Organization: The Power Elite, Houston, TX Lines: 46 > Wrong! WRONG! >WRONG!!!< > For the sake of arguement, let's define a micro as a computer with > a standard semiconductor chip-set (68000-series, 32032, 80286, NCR-32, etc.) > and a mini as something like a VAX, a RISC machine and others.... I like the definition of a micro as anything with a 1-chip CPU, and a mini as anything from several chips to a board for a CPU (thus allowing the LSI-11 chipsets in as micros), but I see no conflict here. > Machines with high speed memory buses and SMD disks will run FASTER than > a VAX 780 and certainly faster than a VAX 750 (not to mention a PDP-11 > running V7 :-)) I have run benchmarks on many machines from CONVEX to > PDP-11/23 and I KNOW that for computation the VAX is bad in price/performance. True. And an 11/70 outperforms it in multiuser benchmarks. > In terms of I/O bandwidth, it becomes of function of controllers, buses, and > disks as well as memory and CPU. > With the wide variety of all those things > in the mini market, there are machine that optimize all those things and > beat the vax hands down. In the mini market. How many *micros* running UNIX would you trust with 35 users doing cs-project type stuff at once? > >Also, don't you mean Maxtor 5.25"? Last I heard 8" > >hard drives were pretty much a loss. > > > >Yeh. I's LOVE a system with a Maxtor whateveritis (the 380Meg 5.25" > >drive), unfortunately nobody seems to be using them. Anyone have any idea > >why not? > > The 8" are. Pretty much a loss? > The OEM's I work for on occasion use the 140 version which is > VERY reliable. They are still waiting on the 380 to evaluate. This implies to > me that they are [not] available yet, so people CAN'T use them. Damn. they've only been advertised for a zillion years. -- Peter (Made in Australia) da Silva UUCP: ...!shell!neuro1!{hyd-ptd,baylor,datafac}!peter MCI: PDASILVA; CIS: 70216,1076