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