jkh@violet.berkeley.edu (Jordan K. Hubbard) (05/18/87)
I would like to correct a misunderstanding that has resulted in an inordinate amount of DEC bashing as of late. While DEC is certainly not perfect (I just had to throw that in), they are not entirely to blame in the "prang situation". The fault lies in the inability of our administrators and DEC to reach an agreement on the support of DEC's "seed" units. Basically, these are units that DEC provides to us gratis for evaluation. DEC has taken something of a bath on these deals in the past, as previous units (like the uVax I's) have seemingly been swallowed up by the campus, never to be seen again. In the case of the uVax I's, this was a benefit to humanity in general. As far as the GPX's go, I can understand their concern. We have now come to the point where we are fixing the "old prang" out of our own pocket, and the "new prang" may be fixed by DEC. I would prefer to use the new prang in the role of "X distribution point" as it has more disk and memory, but perhaps the old prang will find a role as a backup machine or something (suggestions are welcome). Hopefully, DEC and our administrators will come to an accord, and both prangs will receive official support. In the meantime, the blame lies not with DEC, but with bureaucracy. Jordan Hubbard Computer Facilities & Communications U.C. Berkeley