Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!ittatc!bunker!shap
From: shap@bunker.UUCP (Joseph D. Shapiro)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.unix
Subject: Re: How Good is the AT&T 6300 Plus?
Message-ID: <1198@bunker.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Jun-86 13:46:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: bunker.1198
Posted: Tue Jun 17 13:46:29 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Jun-86 07:50:32 EDT
References: <1927@osu-eddie.UUCP> <350@omen.UUCP> <1286@amiga.amiga.UUCP> <9885@ucsfcgl.ucsfcgl.UUCP>
Reply-To: shap@bunker.UUCP (Joseph D. Shapiro)
Organization: Bunker Ramo, Trumbull Ct
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.micro.pc:8711 net.unix:8201

In article <9885@ucsfcgl.ucsfcgl.UUCP> russack@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Joe
	Russack%CGL) writes:
>
>	The pc compatibility is not too good. It is passing, (and much
>	better than unmentionable clones) but not as good as some
>	others (like the ITT, compaq,etc).
>
>Joseph Russack
>
>!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!russack

	point of interest, the 6300 (although i'm not possitive about
the plus) is made by Olivetti for AT&T.  The comperable ITT machine is
also made by Olivetti.  Olivetti sells it themselves as the M24.  All
three machines are identical except for paint and such.

	None of this is secret, you can gather as much from the trade
journals, but how can the ATT differ from the ITT in that respect?
Must be a case of perspective.
-- 
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_

Joseph D. Shapiro			"He who hesitates
Bunker Ramo Information Systems		 is lunch"

...ittatc!bunker!shap
...decvax!bunker!shap