Xref: utzoo comp.protocols.appletalk:2309 comp.sys.mac:36790 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wasatch!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!ndosl!symbas!tag From: tag@symbas.UUCP (Arne Gisvold) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk,comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Experiences with Jasmine DirectServe? Message-ID: <549@symbas.UUCP> Date: 18 Aug 89 14:39:11 GMT References: <3922@phri.UUCP> <21068@paris.ics.uci.edu> Reply-To: tag@symbas.UUCP (Tor Arne Gisvold) Organization: Symbiotic Computer Systems A/S, Trondheim, Norway Lines: 36 In article <21068@paris.ics.uci.edu> truesdel@ics.uci.edu (Scott Truesdell) writes: >roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes: > > >> We're considering buying a Jasmine DirectServe AppleTalk file >>server. Does anybody have any experience, good or bad, with these? >>-- > >The DirectServe isn't available yet. It would be pretty hard to get an >opinion about the operation "in situ" without breaking non-disclosure or >asking someone else to. > Interesting - but not correct. We have been running these boxes for more than 12 months now - admittedly with another name on the front (FerroShare/SymbShare). The software in fron of me is "DirectServe version 1.0b10" if you are interested. The project did not originate with Jasmine at all - but with a small english company called Ferroglen, and they have been selling it for approcimately 14 months now. They have signed an agreement for joint development and distribution with jasmine to reach a wider market. I have never signed a non-disclosure agreement on this incidentally. The original software had a few snags - a limit of 11 users was the main one - amd AppleShare 1.0 compatibility. The new "DirectServe" version has had the problems ironed out by an Australian university and Jasmine as far as I know. We are satisfied with the boxes this far - and have 5 of them running at various sites. Regards Tor-Arne Gisvold