Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc! From: lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: A3000UX competition Keywords: Unix A3000 A3000UX NeXT Message-ID: <2300@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> Date: 1 Dec 90 19:02:38 GMT Lines: 159 Return-Path: To: van-bc!rnews In <453@mathlab.math.ufl.EDU>, adin@Math.UFL.EDU (Adin Burroughs) writes: >>>UNIX SVR4 license, X-Windows, Open Look. Full man pages. >>>3000UX-100: 4MB fast scram, 1MB chip, 100MB Quantum HD 19ms access. >>>3000UX-200: 8MB fast scram, 1MB chip, 2UNIX SVR4 license, X-Windows, Open Look. >>>Full man pages. >>>Price of $3999 for the 3000UX-100, $4999 for the -200, the 3000UX-200 >>>also includes an ethernet board bundled with. Bundles also include >>>the 1950 monitor. These prices were confirmed by my local dealer. >>>Official commercial release at UNIFORUM (feb???) >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > I personally wouldn't want to subject myself to Sys V again, but R4 is > supposed to be signifigantly better. Depending on what vendor is being spoken of, there may not be much choice soon. Sun, for one, will be fuly SysVR4 in the next major release, as are many other vendors. Even DEC is going that way, regardless of their affiliation with the 90 megabuck smokebomb (OSF). > If you don't like Open Look (from what I have seen Randy show me of > it, I don't much), you can replace it with parts of the MIT > distribution. You can get X stuff from Randy, but you will spend time > porting it. Huh? OpenLook is a spec for a graphic user interface, while X is a transport mechanism for communication between applications and a display. X is included in the CBM offering. Of couse you can replace OpenLook with virtually anything you want for the GUI. > I would worry about a vendor that called the full man pages an extra. > At that rate, the C compiler (and the text processing tools, and the > networking software, and the networking hardware) is an extra. SCO > did this shit with the XENIX on the PC's, too. Who said they call full man pages an extra? If the above inclusion is complete, it does not say that they are extra. If it is not complete, and something about them being extra is said, then I would say that CBM has been misquoted. There has never been any doubt that the man pages were included. The CBM distribution is VERY complete, and no shoddy tricks are pulled by leaving out such things as compilersand text processing tools. > 4 Meg of core is a rediculous on a workstation now, just as the 3/50's > are. However, you can get cheap third-party memory. I would worry > about a UNIX vendor that tried to sell me a 4 Meg workstation. Just > how bad is the performance? What CPU/clock-speed are we talking here? If it runs in 4 meg, there is absolutely nothing wrong with offering it in that configuration. Many folks prefer it that way, so that they can use third party memory, or perhaps memory they have already. Perhaps a user can afford only the minimal configuration and plans to expand later. Isn't it better to have the choice? Do you worry about a Unix vendor that offers a workstation without hard disk? Of course not. I won't even dignify the negatively loaded question 'just how slow is it?', except to say that if you are going to compare it to a NeXT, why would you care? Clock speed is 25 MHz. > What kind of monitor is that? How big is it? Can it compete in > resolution with a Sun? A NeXT? I would prefer high-res mono to > low-res color, as that allows me much more text on the screen. Don't know about the NeXT, but it does not match the resolution of a Sun. On the other hand, it is a low cost monitor, and offers all the resolution that a standard Amiga does (the machine _is_ a standard Amiga, but happens to have Unix installed), and thus provides colour. For higher resolution, there is a 4-grey-scale monitor available. > Anything less than 300 meg is too small, add $500 for a bigger drive. > > Price: $4,999 + $500 = $5,499. Are there educations discounts to cut > this any? The size of the disk to make it useful is purely a function of the amount of stuff on it and the intended use. 100 meg is usable. 200 is better, and VERY usable. 300 is better still, and so on up. Point is, it's the same with the RAM; it gives you the choice of going for the minimum and adding your own stuff to it. Let's leave it at $4999, giving you 200 megs of disk, 8 megs of RAM, and a very usable configuratin. > > NeXT offering: > > 8 Meg + 105 Meg NeXTStation. You've heard me yap about it. Better > video than either of these (resolution-wise). 200 Megs of bundled > software that neither of these can touch. $3,500. Add $750 for > bigger drive to put bundle on. Yes, you can get X for it, but why > would you want to? Maybe you want speed? I don't know how fast X would be on the NeXT, but it sure couldn't be any slower than the display postscript it comes with. > Price: $3,500 + $750 = $4,250. All applicable discounts applied. Yes.. all applicable discounts applied. CBM has both developer and educational discount programs in place, so the comparison is not even close to being valid. > Sun offering: > > SLC. The standard archetecture for net-written software today. > You've seen it and worked with it. It is probably faster than either > of the other platforms. $3,500 for unit + complete SunOS. Add $750 > for drive. Get X from Randy. > > Price: $3,000 + $750 = $3,750. This is with all applicable discounts > applied. Yes, the SLC is faster than either of the other two. It is also very limited in expansion. You cannot make it colour. Max memory is less than either of the other two, and for hard disk, you are talking about external units only, with attendant cases/power supplies. Again, all applicable discounts for the price, so the comparison is again invalid. > I fault the Commodore for non-BSDness, but then again I fault HP's and > Ardent's too. Try it. BSDness is in there, a lot of it. That's what SysVR4 is all about; it is the merged SysV and BSD. You may be pleasantly surprised. BSD 'pureness' on Suns is coming to and end too. > I personally wouldn't go back to it. Commodore as a > workstation vendor gets a vote of "no confidence...yet. That's a fair comment. There are a number of issues that have yet to be explored, such as support, to cite one example. > Try one more time" for their strategies of 4 Meg and broken-up OS. Broken up? Please point out how it is 'broken up'. > In another > iteration, this will be a reasonable package for someone who wants > Amiga backward-compatibility bad enough to pay for it. DO YOU really > want it that bad? Well, I do. I have two Suns and two Amigas. I will be getting Unix for the A3000 I already have. While I think of it, I might point out that the 3000UX is nothing more than a particular configuration of standard Amiga products. When I install Unix, I will probably dedicate about 200 megs of HD for it, leaving the other 200 for Amiga stuff. The tape drives can both be used for either OS. > Instead of (a) keeping your Amiga to do Amiga > things, and (b) getting a workstation to do workstation things? That > is the choice I am making with my PC. I am keeping my PC, but getting > a separate workstation. NOT getting a 386 or 486 PC. Well, _that_ I can understand! I won't be getting a '386 or '486 machine either. :-) -larry -- The only things to survive a nuclear war will be cockroaches and IBM PCs. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+