Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!van-bc!ubc-cs!calgary!cpsc!dan
From: dan@cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Daniel Freedman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re: reason to buy Apollos
Message-ID: <1990Jul9.213212.5519@calgary.uucp>
Date: 9 Jul 90 21:32:12 GMT
References: <9007070357.AA00259@zeus.WRI.com>
Sender: news@calgary.uucp (Network News Manager)
Reply-To: dan@cs-sun-fsd.UUCP (Daniel Freedman)
Organization: U. of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Lines: 30

In article <9007070357.AA00259@zeus.WRI.com> leland@wri.UUCP writes:
>

>The question of "Why would anyone buy an Apollo" is like asking "Why would
>anyone buy a Ford?" -- the answer is that people buy whatever they feel most
>confortable *using*. They buy the system that has an editor and debugger they
>are comfortable with and THAT -- not price, technology, or what have you --
>seems to make the difference.

I agree with you entirely, and three years or so ago, there was enough
difference between machines to make level-of-comfort a big part of the
decision as to which machine to buy.  But these days, as I said in my
last posting, anything you can do on an Apollo, you can also do on a
Sun, for less money.  There may be some additional amount of hassle, but
not much.  I think that the important issues today are: price, performance,
and standards.  Suns have taken over from vaxes as the "standard" machine --
the machine (or at least the o/s) by which others are judged for 
compatability.  They also perform well, and are cheap.  I wish I could
justify buying Apollos, since I truly believe that the o/s is superior, and
that the hardware is more or less exemplary.  Unfortunately, these issues
are losing in terms of perceived importance to the 3 issues I mentioned
above.

	Dan Freedman



U. of Calgary Computer Science Dept.,                             403 220-7299
2500 University Dr. N.W.,                                 dan@cpsc.ucalgary.ca
Calgary, Alberta, Canada. T2N 1N4