Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!pikes!mercury.cair.du.edu!isis!kreme From: kreme@isis.cs.du.edu (Harvey Leech) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc Subject: What's wrong with the new Mac IIsi? Message-ID: <1990Oct17.182528.23255@isis.cs.du.edu> Date: 17 Oct 90 18:25:28 GMT Reply-To: kreme@isis.UUCP (Harvey Leech) Distribution: usa Organization: Pseudo-Dragon Protection League Lines: 26 Hi. I've been elected to make a purchase recommendation for a small Mac network (One server, three terminals, and the ability to expand to as many as 10-12 terminals in the future) and I was looking at the new Macs as possibilities. What I was thinking of doing is using Mac Classics as terminals and a Mac IIsi with an 80 Meg drive and 5Mg or Ram as a the server. I guess my question is: "Is there any reason to spring for a whole hell of a lot more money and get a IIci or something?" The network will be used to do all the accounting, Newsletter publishing, letter writting, and also for some educational uses. The Sales Rep though this setup would work out fine, but I wanted to get some input from the net (more realistic and experienced I'm sure). Is there any shortcomming of the mac IIsi? Any glaring oversight? Thanks in advance for your time. Please reply directly to my e-mail address and I will post a reply (I get mails right away, some posts take us a week to see). -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | kreme@nyx.cs.du.edu |Growing up leads to growing old, and then to dying, and| |---------------------|dying to me don't sound like all that much fun. | | |