snelson@cbnewsd.ATT.COM (steven.c.nelson) (11/30/89)
I would very much like to obtain Xenix for my ALR SX386Z, but I have been having a world of trouble getting a version that will boot. My reseller originally ordered the 386-AT version for me, but it absolutely refused to even boot. From what I've been able to determine the incompatibility is with the Seagate 80Meg SCSI hard drive that I've got installed in this machine. My reseller was told by SCO that I needed the 386-GT update. Has anyone had any experience with this version? The reseller and their distributor have never heard of it. They ended up FAX'ing their order directly to SCO. I'd really like to know if this has any chance of working before I shell out more money for the GT update. Thanks, s.c.nelson
lance@embassy.UUCP (Lance N. Antrim) (11/30/89)
From article <3399@cbnewsd.ATT.COM>, by snelson@cbnewsd.ATT.COM (steven.c.nelson): > > I'd really like to know if this has any chance of working before I shell > out more money for the GT update. > > Thanks, > s.c.nelson The GT version provides support for SCSI drives and for DC-2000 tape drives (not all are supported, but more than just the Irwin drive supported by the AT version). When I got my system (2.3.2) the AT version listed for $100 less than the GT. I don't know what has happened since then, but it seems strange to confuse the product line with both the AT and GT versions. Does anyone know if the AT version is (or has been) dropped? -- Lance Antrim Project on Multilateral Negotiation ..!uunet!embassy!lance American Academy of Diplomacy ___________________________________________________________________________
davidsen@sungod.crd.ge.com (William Davidsen) (12/02/89)
In article <119@embassy.UUCP> lance@embassy.UUCP (Lance N. Antrim) writes: | I don't know what has | happened since then, but it seems strange to confuse the product line | with both the AT and GT versions. Does anyone know if the AT version is | (or has been) dropped? The AT version dropped? I suspect that SCO sells about an order of magnitude more AT versions than the GT. bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM) {uunet | philabs}!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
daveh@marob.masa.com (Dave Hammond) (12/04/89)
In article <3399@cbnewsd.ATT.COM> snelson@cbnewsd.ATT.COM writes: >My reseller originally ordered the 386-AT version for me, but it >absolutely refused to even boot. From what I've been able to determine >the incompatibility is with the Seagate 80Meg SCSI hard drive that >I've got installed in this machine. > >My reseller was told by SCO that I needed the 386-GT update. Has >anyone had any experience with this version? The reseller and their >distributor have never heard of it. They ended up FAX'ing their order >directly to SCO. We just upgraded an Everex 25mhz 386 machine with a ST-506 drive to ESDI (Maxtor 1470) by ordering the GT upgrade kit. The installation went almost flawlessly. The (dkinit?) installation procedure failed to properly read the ESDI setup info from the drive, but it was a simple matter to type in the correct values. I have no experience with installing SCSI drives, but the GT-installation has no obvious problems. BTW, the GT was the first installion in which `mkdev tape' actually found the right parameters when auto-detecting the tape configuration. Or perhaps this was just the first time we installed the right drive. :-) -- Dave Hammond daveh@marob.masa.com
mikes@NCoast.ORG (Mike Squires) (12/07/89)
I'm running SCO XENIX 2.3.2 GT on a Tandy 4000LX with an Adaptec 1540A (not Tandy) controller and a CDC SCSI primary, Micropolis SCSI secondary, and Cipher 150BM SCSI streamer. The installation was completely without incident (other than working perfectly). The drives seem sightly slower than an ESDI controller but the easy expansion is worth it. This system is now running as a public access BBS at 814 337 0348 (2400/1200/ 9600 HST) and 814 337 3159 (2400/19.2K/9600/1200 TB+).