richard@gryphon.UUCP (01/01/70)
In article <2239@emory.uucp> phssra@emory.UUCP (Scott R. Anderson) writes: >In article <46807@seismo.CSS.GOV> dsc@izimbra.CSS.GOV (David S. Comay) writes: >> >> 1. i want to run affordable software in a windowing >> environment. there are few programs in that class available on >> the sun or for that matter, the apollo. there are quite a few >> programs including pagemaker, more, ready set go, etc that are >> extremely useful and resonably affordable (at least compared to >> the per cpu charges for things like interleaf) available today >> on the macintosh ii. > >This is certainly true, but that will hopefully change as more >programs are developed with interfaces for UNIX-based window systems >such as X and NeWS (e.g. TeX). The distinction between big 'personal computers' and small workstations is starting to blurr. Interleaf for the mac costs $2495, there are a number of "messing with text" programs around that price for (at least) the Apollo. >The type of software one wishes to run is definitely an important factor. >For more traditional programming, though, you have to keep in mind that >UNIX boxes like Sun workstations come with a lot of standard software, >such as editors, compilers, and debuggers. Buying these for the Mac >adds up very quickly. Plus things like distributed filesystems and multitasking. >> >> 3. the macintosh ii is expandable while the sun 3/50 is not. >> if you want to compare hardware and their costs, a comparision >> between a sun 3/160 and a macintosh ii would be more useful. > >This depends on whether you need to expand it or not. Many people will >be satisfied with ethernet, disk and tape drive as the only peripherals. True. The Apollo though, is both cheap and expandable (AT slots). > >* Scott Anderson > * ** gatech!emoryu1!phssra > * * * ** phssra@emoryu2.{bitnet,csnet} > * * * * * ** > * * * * * * * * (pfffft) -- Richard J. Sexton INTERNET: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard "It's too dark to put the key in my ignition..."
benoni@ssc-vax.UUCP (09/18/87)
In article <1523@gryphon.CTS.COM>, richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: > >> 3. the macintosh ii is expandable while the sun 3/50 is not. > >> if you want to compare hardware and their costs, a comparision > >> between a sun 3/160 and a macintosh ii would be more useful. > > > >This depends on whether you need to expand it or not. Many people will > >be satisfied with ethernet, disk and tape drive as the only peripherals. > > True. The Apollo though, is both cheap and expandable (AT slots). > Another alternative which is interesting is the NEW sun 3/60 (not to be confused with the Sun 3/160). The machine is expandable to 24 meg of memory, built in Ethernet, 20 Mhz 68020, 20 Mhz 68881, Full Unix (SunOS), three compilers (fortran, C, Pascal), Support for high resolution color (double the Mac II) or 1600x1280 Monochrome or 1052x900 monochrome..or an 1052x900 grayscale... Incidentally it is probably more worthwhile to compare the Mac II to a Sun 3/60 or Sun 3/110 (this one has a VME-bus - which is expandable). Sun also sells (for $100) NeWS...and X is also available... i have given up on Apollo producing a decent Unix system.....otherwise i would consider them. Also I have seen to many Apollo hardware illnesses (such is the problem of dealing with 50+ machines...you get more problems than you really care to see). The Mac II is expandable hardware-wise however the type of expansion I would consider for the machine would be a better monitor and video card combination that would double the 640x480 resolution...(both Apollo and Sun give you around 1000x1000 outright) Additionally the Mac II starts with 2 meg and you have to buy 2 meg (to get where Sun/Apollo are)... (also starts with 4 bit planes and you have to buy to get where Sun at with 8 ) The Mac II winds up nickle and diming you to death. Finally...there is no word how much A/UX costs for the Mac II... (which brings up do they have an MMU?) Recently MacWeek ran a comparison between the Sun 3/60 and the Mac II. The article actually FAVORED the Sun 3/60.
asp@puck.UUCP (Andy Puchrik) (09/20/87)
> Another alternative which is interesting is the NEW sun 3/60 (not to > be confused with the Sun 3/160). The machine is expandable to 24 meg > of memory, built in Ethernet, 20 Mhz 68020, 20 Mhz 68881, Full Unix > (SunOS), three compilers (fortran, C, Pascal), Support for high > resolution color (double the Mac II) or 1600x1280 Monochrome or > 1052x900 monochrome..or an 1052x900 grayscale... This is a very interesting machine, especially when you add your own disk and controller. Does anyone know what the monthly/annual hardware maintenance cost is? Does Sun bundle in the first year of h/w maint like DEC does for their Vaxstations? -- Internet: asp@puck.UUCP Andy Puchrik uucp: decvax!necntc!necis!puck!asp Moonlight Systems ARPA: puchrik@tops20 Maynard, MA 01754
phssra@emory.uucp (Scott R. Anderson) (09/21/87)
In article <1432@ssc-vax.UUCP> benoni@ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel) writes: >Additionally the Mac II starts with >2 meg and you have to buy 2 meg (to get where Sun/Apollo are)... It's even worse than that: the Mac II only starts with one MB, not two. >The Mac II winds up nickle and diming you to death. Of course, if all you have are nickels and dimes, this may be your only option :-). * Scott R. Anderson * ** gatech!emoryu1!phssra * * * ** phssra@emoryu2.{bitnet,csnet} * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Oops!
rob@uokmax.UUCP (09/22/87)
In article <233@puck.UUCP> asp@puck.UUCP (Andy Puchrik) writes: >>(Text about the Sun 3/60 and its expandability) >This is a very interesting machine, especially when you add your own disk >and controller. Does anyone know what the monthly/annual hardware maintenance >cost is? Does Sun bundle in the first year of h/w maint like DEC does for >their Vaxstations? Sun has a RIGID 90 day warranty period on all of their equipment. After that, unless you purchase a maintenance contract (about $150-200 a month for a minimal setup), it gets VERY expensive. About 40% of retail for 30 day turnaround on a board swap, about 105% of retail for overnight. Same kind of problem with software upgrades. Unless you have software maintenance, your basically out of luck. That's my only real objection to the Suns. Other than that, I'm extremely pleased with the ones here. They ARE very nice machines to use. -- Robert K. Shull University of Oklahoma, Engineering Computer Network ihnp4!occrsh!uokmax!rob CIS 73765,1254 Delphi RKSHULL Opinions contained herein in no way reflect those of the University of Oklahoma.
thornton@ssc-vax.UUCP (Ken Thornton) (09/25/87)
In article <1432@ssc-vax.UUCP>, benoni@ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel) writes: > > Another alternative which is interesting is the NEW sun 3/60 (not to > be confused with the Sun 3/160). The machine is expandable to 24 meg > of memory, built in Ethernet, 20 Mhz 68020, 20 Mhz 68881, Full Unix > (SunOS), three compilers (fortran, C, Pascal), Support for high > resolution color (double the Mac II) or 1600x1280 Monochrome or > 1052x900 monochrome..or an 1052x900 grayscale... > > ........The Mac II winds up nickle and diming you to death. > Finally...there is no word how much A/UX costs for the Mac II... > (which brings up do they have an MMU?) > This is interesting. Assuming I can buy extra RAM, a video card, and monitor to bring the Mac II to Sun 3/60 specs, how do these machines compare in price? A common complain I've heard concerning the use of the Mac II as a low-cost Unix workstation is that it does not have DMA to disk. The '020 must do all of the disk I/O itself. How well does the 3/60 perform disk I/O? It would also have been nice if Apple had provided a graphics coprocessor as an option (such as the TI, Intel, or AMD chips). Will third parties be able to emulate the QuickDraw? If you've ever run SunCore on the Sun 3, it can be quite slow as well. Ken Thornton -- /\ /\/ \/\ / / /\/ \ Ken Thornton {decvax,ihnp4}!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!ssc-bee!thornton / / / \ \