Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!ukc!mucs!mshute
From: mshute@cs.man.ac.uk (Malcolm Shute)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Historical architectural advances??
Message-ID: <1868@m1.cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: 31 Oct 90 13:34:47 GMT
References: <8139@scolex.sco.COM> <0KC6TSG@xds13.ferranti.com> <8185@scolex.sco.COM>
Sender: news@cs.man.ac.uk
Reply-To: mshute@cs.man.ac.uk (Malcolm Shute)
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester UK
Lines: 11

In article <8185@scolex.sco.COM> seanf (Sean Fagan) writes:
>A mainframe should be able to handle a hundred or more users, [...]
>A mini, on the other hand, should be able to handle 10-20 users, without
>slowing down. [...]

Does your classification scheme handle a loosley coupled system
(such as a department's worth of SUNs connected on a LAN)...
Does the overall system (network) qualify as being a mainframe/supermini?
--

Malcolm SHUTE.         (The AM Mollusc:   v_@_ )        Disclaimer: all