Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pacbell!cogent!mark From: mark@cogent.UUCP (Captain Neptune) Newsgroups: comp.sys.att Subject: Re: 3b2/300 or 3b1 ----> I PREFER 3B1 BY A LONG SHOT!! Keywords: 3B2 = expensive slow junky boat-anchor Message-ID: <471@cogent.UUCP> Date: 13 Jul 88 17:21:10 GMT References: <279@jackson.UUCP> Reply-To: mark@cogent.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE) Organization: Cogent Software Solutions, Stockton, CA Lines: 22 In article <279@jackson.UUCP> egranthm@jackson.UUCP (Ewan Grantham) writes: >Have recently been looking at trying to acquire a 3b1 system when a >local vendor contacted me with a 'deal' on a 3b2/300. The 3b2/300 >comes with 1 meg ram, 30 meg HD, and Unix V.3 > >Since the price of the system is $2350, I'm wondering if this is a better >deal than the 3b1. Is the 3b2/300 better supported by AT&T? Will I be able >to do more with it? We had a 3B2/300 in our office for quite a while. We eventually returned the piece of junk because it was excruciatingly slow - as long as 30 minutes to comile a fairly large program! I'd prefer my 3B1 (actually made by Convergent) over any of the boat anchors that AT&T made (i.e. 3B2, 3Bwhatever) Incidentally, I've seen benchmarks where the 3B2s and 3B5s came in at the bottom of the whole bunch, including $-per-performance ratings. -- Mark Steven Jeghers "No reward for resistance, Cogent Software Solutions no assistance, ...ihnp4!ptsfa!pacbell!cogent!mark no applause..." ...uunet!lll-winken!cogent!mark Neil Peart