FJW@MIT-MC (04/10/83)
From: Frank J. Wancho <FJW @ MIT-MC>
I believe the discussion proposed in this message properly belongs on
WorkS and I will attempt to divert responses to this list. --Frank
--------------------
Date: 10 Apr 83 04:15:21 EST
From: MBF at cmu-cs-c.arpa
To: info-micro at brl.arpa
cc: mbf at cmu-cs-c.arpa
Re: Suns, etc...
I second the motion put forth in an earlier post: John Gilmore et al,
show us your stuff!
As a soon-to-be consumer of hi-tech workstations, I for one would like
to see (on this list, in a technical journal, or from one of the workstation
concerns) a comprehensive list of capability comparisons between such
systems as the new 68010-based Sun (Sun II?), the Apollo Domain (including
the new, "inexpensive" system), the Perq II ("inexpensive" version, too),
and the like. For a class of personal workstations with some major
similarities, these machines have many differences at different levels.
Perhaps someone who has extensive experience with two or more of the
machines could post his opinions?
When will the 68010-based SUNs be in available on a production basis?
How about EMACS and Franzlisp? How good is the SUN mouse? How about
distribution, maintenance, software updates? What's the truth about
paging over an n-machine ethernet, for small and large n? How about
when the ethernet is used simple for file accesses and paging is done
using a local disk? Without actually doing statistical analyses of the
disk in question and a 10M ethernet, I don't know the *facts*, but it
seems conceivable that, for small n, a 10M ethernet could compete
favorably with garden-variety winchesters (5-7 MBit/sec transfer rate)
in average access, latency, and transfer rates... but who has the real
lowdown?
It would seem that the new Perq-II is a better competitor with the 68K
systems than the previous machines from Three Rivers.... A recent blurb in
Electronics magazine claims 32-bit demand-paged virtual memory, "Unix"
of some (unnamed) flavor, 2M main memory (standard!), a 32-meg
winchester, and a large (20 in.) landscape monitor with at least the
same bit density as their earlier portrait monitor (which raises screen
resolution to 1280 x 1034)! Also, they claim a minimum-configuration
system starts at $13.9K!! It remains to be seen what is meant by
"minimum configuration". Does anybody have any details? Is this
machine really available?
I feel that more information is needed to make an intelligent decision
than the euphemistic literature available from the manufacturers.
Any information along these lines would be helpful (as long as it's
within the bounds of suitability for the list).
happy hacking,
Mark Dzmura
via mbf@cmu-cs-c