Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1+some 2/3/84; site dual.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!we13!ihnp4!dual!mats
From: mats@dual.UUCP (Mats Wichmann)
Newsgroups: net.lan
Subject: Re: low speed LANs (suggested spec worthwhile?)
Message-ID: <480@dual.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 6-May-84 15:20:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: dual.480
Posted: Sun May  6 15:20:51 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 7-May-84 01:11:11 EDT
References: <7583@decwrl.UUCP> <711@hammer.UUCP>
Organization: Dual Systems, Berkeley, CA
Lines: 26

Whether or not the suggested board is useful depends on its' intended
scope. I doubt whether the computer industry as a whole is going to
embrace the idea, but it might well find a niche somewhere. After all,
a LOT of people are using Corvus' rather awful OMNINET (that was a
personal opinion, folks - and don't bother flaming), and even more
would never consider touching it (like me). Even with its' rather
limited distribution, it would have to be called a successful
project.  I think there is alway going to be room for a well-done,
low-cost LAN scheme.

As to the comment that the `scaled-down-ethernet' chips will be the
way people are going, this is opinion only. My opinion is that that
is NOT the way very many people are going to go. Specifically, I have
already seen the industry go IBM-compatible-crazy several times; I
would be very surprised if much of the development in the LAN area
during the next year or so is not in the IBM-syle net, whenever the
details of that become clear. And then there's always AT&T to consider...
One would *expect* them to try to emerge as a leader in networking,
since this is really in their line of business. Once again, opinions
only.

Anybody else have thoughts on this?

	    Mats Wichmann
	    Dual Systems Corp.
	    ...{ucbvax,amd70,ihnp4,cbosgd,decwrl,fortune}!dual!mats