Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!im4u!rutgers!clyde!cuae2!ihnp4!houxm!hjuxa!catnip!ben
From: ben@catnip.UUCP (Bennett Broder)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Mainframes vs micros
Message-ID: <435@catnip.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Dec-86 15:13:53 EST
Article-I.D.: catnip.435
Posted: Wed Dec 24 15:13:53 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 25-Dec-86 00:43:07 EST
References: <653@imsvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: ben@catnip.UUCP (Bennett Broder)
Organization: The Broder Residence, Holmdel, NJ  07733
Lines: 63

In article <653@imsvax.UUCP> ted@imsvax.UUCP (Ted Holden) writes:
>The comparison is between a mainframe and a system of micros.  Four years ago
>there may have been some break-even point beyond which the multi-user machine
>was cheaper on a per user basis; now it isn't even close.  A good 8mh XT compat
>with a hard disk can be had now for less than the cost of a terminal to a
>mainframe.  Especially for applications which are screen I/O intensive, the
>idea of using multi-user computers no longer makes any sense.  A VAX set up to
>serve 30 people doing mostly word processing will cost $150K - $200K, including
>terminals, wiring, and software.  It'll be slower than hell, you'll have 30
>people out looking for jobs all the time and, whenever it goes down, you'll
>have 30 people sitting on their thumbs for two or three whole days.  
>
>$70K, intelligently spent, could have XT class machines on everybody's desk
>with legal copies of WordPerfect and good dot-matrix printers, two laser
>printers for everybody to share, and two or three back-up machines off to one
>side so that nobody ever sits on their thumbs when a machine goes down;  you
>just swap one of the extras for the machine out being fixed.  Development
>environments in which most users' time is spent in text editors present an
>entirely similar situation.

You are leaving out one of the most important features of a multi-user
system, sharing of data.  What happens when one of your 30 people wants
to do a mail-merge of data stored on another machine?  What happens when
the database on machine one says I live at 33 maple street, and on machine
two says I live at 12 vine street?  You have on your hands a disaster.
The only way PCs make sense for a big company is if they are networked
with a high speed (ethernet or equivilent) local area network.  If you
add the cost of networking hardware and software into the picture, the
multiuser machines starts looking a lot cheaper.

>I have never seen anyone smile while using a mainframe the way they do using
>ATs.  There are many good reasons.  Memory for multi-user machines has always
>been expensive and scarce;  you no sooner try to scroll down one page in an
>editor or word processor on a mainframe than you have to swap information in
>from disk and you're ALWAYS 300'th in line to use that disk.  Memory for PCs is
>dirt cheap and DOS programs such as WordPerfect and SuperCalc reflect that and
>USE it as if it were plentiful.  WordPerfect can scroll through a 50 or 100
>page document in seconds;  I don't know of any mainframe product which can.  

I have a hunch that your smiling AT users are not people who have to write
big programs.  Memory for the IBM-AT may be cheap, but it a pain in the
**** to access.  To someone who learned to program in 'C' on a vax, the
AT is a 64k machine.  Doubt what I say?  I have an AT with several megs
of extended memory.  Send me a working pathalias.

>As I see it, the day of the expensive computer is about over.  It is only for
>super-computer applications such as weather forecasting and really big database
>applications that they could be justified at all any more, and the small
>machines will be capable of those activities in another couple of years.

You may be right.  When I see the power of the 68030 and the 80386, I am
astounded.  I suspect that in a few years, you will have all the compute
power you need, right in you own machine.  But I think that the answer for
today is blend of machines.  A combination of PCs, multiusers PCs, minis
and mainframes all linked together with a high speed network.  That way,
the micros can do what they do best (interactive stuff like spreadsheets) while
the minis and mainframes what they do best (number crunching and storing
gigabytes of data to be shared by all users).
-- 

Ben Broder
{ihnp4,decvax} !hjuxa!catnip!ben
{houxm,clyde}/