neese@cpe.UUCP (06/30/88)
And let's take it even farther. I am constantly surprised at the ignorance so many users show. (i.e. "IBM is state of the art and the most powerful systems money can buy") What a joke! But this attitude is spread all over corporate America. Primarily due to the folks that do the recommendations to buy IBM equipment. They justify buying IBM by saying IBM is the best you can buy because of the performance and by making statements that lead their management to beleive that IBM is the only company that can support their effort. Hogwash! Let's look at some facts: 1) When IBM introduced the PC, the industry took a giant step backwards in performance. Tandy was shipping a CPU that had an 8MHZ 68000 and a 4MHZ Z80 co-processor when this 4.77MHz box hit the streets. What a dog! The industry is just now catching up with what was going on back in 1983 as far as performance is concerned. 2) Now, when it appears we are finally getting back to the performance we lost when IBM entered the forray, they introduce a Micro-Channel bus and a 20MHZ 80386 w 1/wait state. Here we go again. Now while the MC bus has some nice features, there are also some devastating things about it. Try plugging in a 32Bit MC Memory Board into your Model 80 and watch the performance take a 400% hit due to the overhead of the bus. In all the performance comparisons I have done, the Model 80-111 measures much slower that a 16Mhz Tandy 4000 w/SCSI HD's. Not to mention how much slower it is than the Compaq DeskPro 386-20. People that think the IBM is fast must not have ever looked at anything else. At least the Tandy 5000MC has a dedicated memory slot for expansion memory so it won't have to go through the MC bus, and a memory cache controller so it won't have to run at 1 wait state. Let's face it, there is a lot of equipment out there that can run circles around the IBM equipment and it will always cost you less money. I look forward to the day thet corporate America finally wakes up and starts firing these idiotic purchasing personnel for giving such one-sided views of the world of CPU's. Well I'll get off of my soapbox,....for now. Roy Neese UUCP @ ihnp4!sys1!cpe!neese /* Usual disclaimer */
" Maynard) (07/03/88)
In article <12400004@cpe> neese@cpe.UUCP writes: a real paean to the alleged superiority of Tandy products. What he didn't tell you the first time around that his machine: > Roy Neese > UUCP @ ihnp4!sys1!cpe!neese ^^^ is a system owned by Tandy's Computer Products Engineering group. Come now, Roy...didn't you want to admit that you were just plugging your own products? Another thing he didn't tell you is that the Tandy computer group is, at least at the retail level, uniformly staffed with the worst dullards who ever tried to claim any knowledge of computers. The few who really do know something get lost in the noise. The service staff is abysmal, and only stopped blaming problems with Tandy machines on non-Tandy hardware - even such innocuous things as memory chips - when a court ordered them to. The real reason that business stays with IBM, as opposed to going to Tandy, is that Tandy is a terrible company to do business with. I wouldn't think of recommending them to a company that needed any kind of support at all. Sorry if this sounds bitter; I've had many bad experiences with Tandy products, and Tandy "software", and Tandy "service". Never again. -- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC...>splut!< | Never ascribe to malice that which can uucp: uunet!nuchat! | adequately be explained by stupidity. hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!splut!jay +---------------------------------------- {killer,bellcore}!tness1! | Birthright Party '88: let's get spaced!