Xref: utzoo comp.unix.xenix:1368 comp.sys.ibm.pc:10963
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!pilchuck!ssc!fyl
From: fyl@ssc.UUCP (Phil Hughes)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Get a Wyse 80386 box w/SCO Xenix?
Message-ID: <975@ssc.UUCP>
Date: 21 Jan 88 19:14:36 GMT
References: <139@amcad.UUCP> <594@spdcc.COM> <140@amcad.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: SSC, Inc., Seattle, WA
Lines: 27
Keywords: wyse 3216 80386 xenix SCO


We have been using a 286 system running SCO XENIX and Progress for
about 2 years.  We just got a 386 system for use in our training
classes.  We have both the Arnet dumb and smart boards.
Here are my comments:

The configuration sounds fine.  I would watch RAM usage as the new
version of Progress (4.2) is much bigger.  Over 500K.

The Arnet dumb boards work fine but there have been problems with
the smart one.  I think it is finally under control but wouldn't swear
to it.  One of our consulting customers just bought a Wyse system
with the Wyse comm board and it all seems to be working so far.
He has only had it for a few weeks so time will tell if bugs appear.

The performance difference between the 286 and 386 is significant.
I have yet to run serious benchmarks but I expect it is 4-5 times.
I taught my last Unix for Programmers class on the 286 the first
day and the 386 for the following two days.  Even though the 286
was not really slow the students were amazed with the difference.
Much of this is due to faster disk transfers.  The disk controller
is not DMA so processor speed matters.  Also, I was able to configure
the disk with 2:1 interleave instead of the normal 3:1 which increased
the effective transfer rate.
-- 
Phil Hughes, SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155  (206)FOR-UNIX
    uw-beaver!tikal!ssc!fyl or uunet!pilchuck!ssc!fyl or attmail!ssc!fyl