Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!BYUVAX.BITNET!HIGHAMP
From: HIGHAMP@BYUVAX.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: 8800 as a BATCH-machine ?
Message-ID: <8708261509.AA03386@jade.berkeley.edu>
Date: Wed, 26-Aug-87 11:10:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: jade.8708261509.AA03386
Posted: Wed Aug 26 11:10:00 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 28-Aug-87 05:09:58 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 21

Posting-Version: BYU News Program 0.8 (VAX VMS)
Subject: Re: 8800 as a BATCH-machine ?

I appreciate Jon Forrest's comments.  I've always thought of VAXen as primarily
interactive tools as well.

However, here at Signetics (a Philips subsidiary, as a matter of fact) we
run a very tight production schedule which requires that we experience NO
rude surprises from our interactive users.  We are about to start up a 785
batch machine (8800?  wouldn't it be nice...) so that we can tightly control
our manufacturing environment.  There is a big difference between research
and industrial facilities.

I'd love to hear anyones experiences (good or bad) running batch only systems.
We feel as if it is the best thing to do, but with no experience, it's a
scary plunge.

Dave Higham
System Programmer
Signetics Corp.
Orem, UT