Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!thornton
From: thornton@ssc-vax.UUCP (Ken Thornton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.misc
Subject: Re: 386 v '020/Small wkstns vs. big pc's
Message-ID: <905@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 25-Sep-87 00:43:46 EDT
Article-I.D.: ssc-bee.905
Posted: Fri Sep 25 00:43:46 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 27-Sep-87 09:54:02 EDT
References: <1376@imagen.UUCP> <116@faccs.UUCP> <509@sbcs.UUCP> <1179@pdn.UUCP> <1432@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Organization: Boeing/UW Seattle
Lines: 32
Keywords: sun macintosh

In article <1432@ssc-vax.UUCP>, benoni@ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel) writes:
> 
> Another alternative which is interesting is the NEW sun 3/60 (not to
> be confused with the Sun 3/160). The machine is expandable to 24 meg
> of memory, built in Ethernet, 20 Mhz 68020, 20 Mhz 68881, Full Unix
> (SunOS), three compilers (fortran, C, Pascal), Support for high
> resolution color (double the Mac II) or 1600x1280 Monochrome or 
> 1052x900 monochrome..or an 1052x900 grayscale...
> 
> ........The Mac II winds up nickle and diming you to death. 
> Finally...there is no word how much A/UX costs for the Mac II...
> (which brings up do they have an MMU?)
> 

This is interesting. Assuming I can buy extra RAM, a video card, and monitor
to bring the Mac II to Sun 3/60 specs, how do these machines compare in price?

A common complain I've heard concerning the use of the Mac II as a low-cost
Unix workstation is that it does not have DMA to disk. The '020 must do all of
the disk I/O itself. How well does the 3/60 perform disk I/O?

It would also have been nice if Apple had provided a graphics coprocessor
as an option (such as the TI, Intel, or AMD chips). Will third parties be
able to emulate the QuickDraw? If you've ever run SunCore on the Sun 3, it
can be quite slow as well.

Ken Thornton
-- 
     /\          
  /\/  \/\   
 / / /\/  \ Ken Thornton  {decvax,ihnp4}!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!ssc-bee!thornton   
/ / /  \   \