Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!eecs.nwu.edu!phil
From: phil@eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.encore
Subject: Re: Questions regarding: Mach Release 1.0 for the Multimax
Message-ID: <3649@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Date: 18 Feb 91 17:53:03 GMT
References: <14033@encore.Encore.COM> <3507@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> <14083@encore.Encore.COM>
Sender: news@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Reply-To: phil@eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre)
Organization: Northwestern University
Lines: 26

In article <14083@encore.Encore.COM>, boykin@encore.com (Joseph Boykin) writes:
|> In article <3507@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>, phil@eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) writes:
|> |> Which format does it use for object files and executables?  I'm not
|> |> familiar enough with Mach and Tahoe to answer that on my own.  I hope
|> |> the answer is not "COFF".
|> 
|> The answer is definately COFF since that is what all of Encore's compilers
|> and linkers for the Multimax use.

Hmpph!

|> |> Does anyone have an idea how much it would cost to switch?
|> 
|> $1,000 for Mach.
|> $4,000 for NFS.

I find that pricing structure quite odd.

We already have the "NFS option" for Umax 4.0.  Would we still have to
pay this additional $4000 for NFS under Mach?

		William LeFebvre
		Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst
		Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
		Northwestern University
		<phil@eecs.nwu.edu>