Xref: utzoo comp.unix.amiga:772 comp.unix.sysv386:8244 comp.bugs.sys5:1539
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!becker!bdb
From: bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.bugs.sys5
Subject: Re: Unix 5.4 and ulimit
Message-ID: <103452@becker.UUCP>
Date: 21 May 91 12:39:06 GMT
References: <2550@urbana.mcd.mot.com> <99416@becker.UUCP> <289@harem.clydeunix.com>
Organization: G. T. S., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 32

In article <289@harem.clydeunix.com> wes@harem.clydeunix.com (Barnacle Wes) writes:
|
|In article <99416@becker.UUCP>, bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) writes:
|% 	Apparently the m68k port to the Commodore
|% 	Amiga is in good shape - it certainly doesn't
|% 	cost > $7000(US), even if you include all
|% 	the hardware...
|
|That depends on your definition of "Good Shape."  I played with an
|Amiga 3000/UX at the local dealer a month ago, and I found it to be
|excruciatingly slow, compared to myth, my brother's Step 386/20 with
|ISC Unix.  The speed was comparable to obie, my Sperry PC/IT 7.16 Mhz
|286 with Microport V/AT.  This is a giant step backwards, I think.  I
|guess Commodore should've waited for the 4000/UX ('040 machine).


	Hmmm, you must have been playing with the X/Openlook
	stuff, which isn't currently in Good Shape due to being
	a too-vanilla port of X11R3, sigh. Fixed in Amiga
	Unix 2.0, or so I hear.

	Other than that, unless your dealer was showing some
	older demo version, I'd be surprised if any 386 system
	could come near the performance of the A3000 system
	(no need for the 68040 add-in card to do it either 8^).


-- 
  ,u,	 Bruce Becker	Toronto, Ontario
a /i/	 Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu
 `\o\-e	 UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb
 _< /_	 "It's the death of the net as we know it (and I feel fine)" - R.A.M.