pcb@cacs.usl.edu (Peter C. Bahrs) (04/18/91)
I have run netware for two years, works ok. Then I had a request to
run lantastic on a new lab of compuads with western digital boards.
No problem, I got it and installed it on a couple of machines to
test it out. I borrowed someones ai lanbios kit before I decided to
buy it. The Compuad saleperson said that he can get the kits for
$350 for a site (compared to $100 per machine from Artisoft...getting
close to netware in price now). So I tinkered with lantastic
some more, getting used to it, and it seemed to work fine.
I then realized that 4 other labs on campus were running lantastic
and only two netware.
THEN,
The Compuad salesperson came back and said, quote
'Artisoft is only going to start supporting their own network
cards, i.e. upgrades won't be made available to my WD cards!!???
'
What? I said. This is foolish, don't you think so?mays@panther.gatech.edu (Dick Mays) (04/23/91)
> The Compuad salesperson came back and said, quote > 'Artisoft is only going to start supporting their own network > cards, i.e. upgrades won't be made available to my WD cards!!??? > ' >What? I said. This is foolish, don't you think so? I have no experience with Lantastic, and fail to understand the attraction. Could someone with some knowledge of this NOS explain the benefits of this NOS, (and, or problems). I understand that peer networking is provided, how much RAM is taken from the DOS environment. Is the product Windows compatible in protected or virtual 386 mode? Comments appreciated. -- Dick Mays MAYS, RICHARD CHAPMAN Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!sybil!mays Internet: mays@cc.gatech.edu
sac@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Stuart Alan Craig) (04/23/91)
mays@panther.gatech.edu (Dick Mays) writes: >> The Compuad salesperson came back and said, quote >> 'Artisoft is only going to start supporting their own network >> cards, i.e. upgrades won't be made available to my WD cards!!??? >> ' >>What? I said. This is foolish, don't you think so? >I have no experience with Lantastic, and fail to understand the >attraction. Could someone with some knowledge of this NOS >explain the benefits of this NOS, (and, or problems). >I understand that peer networking is provided, how much RAM >is taken from the DOS environment. Is the product Windows >compatible in protected or virtual 386 mode? Yes Lantastic provides full peer-to-peer networking capabilities which is very nice in small networking environments. No dedicated server is required and you have full access to the devices attached to each node. The main attraction to lantastic has been its relatively low cost and low ram usage. Using their proprietary cards, it only requires about 40k of your DOS environment, sometimes less. As of 10/15/90, Windows-386 was not recognized as compatible due to the diversity of all the products involved. Lantastic will not recognize a product as compatible unless it is FULLY compatible. However, I have heard the some people have gotten windows to work with lantastic, but to what degree I 'm not sure. -Stuart Craig -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Stuart A. Craig | "To iterate is human, to | Internet: sac@matt.ksu.ksu.edu | recurse divine." | Bitnet: sac@ksuvm | -Dennis M. Ritchie
mwb@jpradley.jpr.com (Michael Brown) (04/28/91)
>As of 10/15/90, Windows-386 was not recognized as compatible due to the >diversity of all the products involved. Lantastic will not recognize a >product as compatible unless it is FULLY compatible. However, I have >heard the some people have gotten windows to work with lantastic, but >to what degree I 'm not sure. > >-Stuart Craig > The Artisoft Technical Bulletin on Lantastic and Windows says the following: "Windows 3.0, 3.0a (3.0X) have been tested in house and are compatible with LANtastic 3.XX, however, Windows will not run in enhanced mode on a LANtastic server. Attempting to do so may result in a loss of network functionality, server disconnects or lockups. ...[deleted].... While claiming Windows 3.0X and LANtastic 3.XX are compatible, Artisoft is not responsible for the compatibility of any other application(s) running within Windows unless otherwise noted" The bulletin is dated 02/22/91. Michael Brown mwb@jpradley.jpr.com or uunet!murphy!jpradley!vtssys!mike VTS Systems 718-968-1971 871 East 55th Street Brooklyn, NY 11234 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I give bomb to moose, moose gives bomb to squirrel, who gets blown up? ME!" - Boris Badenov Michael Brown mwb@jpradley.jpr.com or uunet!murphy!jpradley!vtssys!mike VTS Systems 718-968-1971 871 East 55th Street Brooklyn, NY 11234 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sac@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Stuart Alan Craig) (04/30/91)
mwb@jpradley.jpr.com (Michael Brown) writes: >>As of 10/15/90, Windows-386 was not recognized as compatible due to the >>diversity of all the products involved. Lantastic will not recognize a >>product as compatible unless it is FULLY compatible. However, I have >>heard the some people have gotten windows to work with lantastic, but >>to what degree I 'm not sure. >> >>-Stuart Craig >> >The Artisoft Technical Bulletin on Lantastic and Windows says the following: >"Windows 3.0, 3.0a (3.0X) have been tested in house and are compatible with >LANtastic 3.XX, however, Windows will not run in enhanced mode on a LANtastic >server. Attempting to do so may result in a loss of network functionality, >server disconnects or lockups. ...[deleted].... While claiming Windows 3.0X >and LANtastic 3.XX are compatible, Artisoft is not responsible for the >compatibility of any other application(s) running within Windows unless >otherwise noted" >The bulletin is dated 02/22/91. So are we not saying the same thing? -Stuart Craig -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Stuart A. Craig | "To iterate is human, to | Internet: sac@matt.ksu.ksu.edu | recurse divine." | Bitnet: sac@ksuvm | -Dennis M. Ritchie