Path: utzoo!attcan!ncrcan!scocan!seanf
From: seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Workstation Data Integrity
Message-ID: <1990Aug18.210132.25203@sco.COM>
Date: 19 Aug 90 01:01:32 GMT
References: <1990Aug3.204358.330@portia.Stanford.EDU> <40694@mips.mips.COM> <2399@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> <1990Aug10.171744.9639@zoo.toronto.edu> <2421@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Reply-To: seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan)
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Lines: 17

In article <2421@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes:
>  I have had people tell me that the Mac had better hardware because
>"they don't get those stupid parity errors," but I don't even try to
>explain, I just give their names to headhunters.

Wonderful stuff, PC parity.

The two times I've gotten parity errors (that didn't clear up on a reboot),
the chip I've had to replace was the parity chip.

Yep.  I'm so glad it's there.

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "let's face it, finding yourself dead is one 
seanf@sco.COM    |   of life's more difficult moments."
uunet!sco!seanf  |   -- Mark Leeper, reviewing _Ghost_
(408) 458-1422   | Any opinions expressed are my own, not my employers'.