Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!hplabs!hp-pcd!uoregon!dboyes
From: dboyes@uoregon.UUCP (David Boyes)
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: Help us defend against VMS!
Message-ID: <1663@uoregon.UUCP>
Date: 9 Mar 88 00:46:35 GMT
References: <2235@bsu-cs.UUCP> <892@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU> <20403@bu-cs.BU.EDU> <1648@uoregon.UUCP> <910@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU>
Reply-To: dboyes@drizzle.UUCP (David Boyes)
Organization: University of Oregon, Computer Science, Eugene OR
Lines: 57

In article <910@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU> ward@cfa.harvard.EDU (Steve Ward) writes:
>> 
>> True. I'd kill for a medium sized Masscomp or a Convex. Even a medium
>> size IBM 9370 would be an improvement.
>> David Boyes         | ARPA: 556%OREGON1.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.ED
>Before anybody "kill for a MASSCOMP" they might do some serious FORTRAN
>benchmarking and general testing, but THAT is another story....(we have
>a couple of them here....)

I did. Our Masscomp (owned by the chem dept.) outperforms all the VAX
equipment on campus except the 8800, and the 8800 doesn't beat it by
much. They're zippy little boxes, and considering that I can buy one
outright for the price of the license for VMS and FORTRAN for a year
and get an OS license and compilers in the bargain, I'd rather let it
sit there and munge.... In defense of DEC, the chem Masscomp does
have their high-performance FPU, but still -- there's a lot of
difference there.

>Everybody loves a faster computer, one way in a multiuser environment to
>get more cpu is to give the same cpu to many few concurrent users.  We
>do
>this with VAXes.  VAXes are getting faster, but DEC lags behind some
>vendors in the fastest cpu race.  On the other hand DEC offers VAX 
>workstations at great prices (for us they start at about $3K each).
>We run many 1 scientist to the machine and run other larger
>configurations with 16 concurrent users or fewer.  The cost per user
>is lowest for us with DEC VAXes of various MicroVAX and VAXstation 
>models.

Well, this is all well and good, PROVIDED you can afford to do what
you just described. Out here in reality, is simply NOT economically
possible to buy 1 machine for every 16 or so researchers -- the money
just isn't there.

>DEC does offer some useful and very economical options, at least to us
>through our DEC University Consortium contract.  We will continue to
>take advantage of the depth and breadth of market offerings that make
>sense for us.  I would think that while you don't want to be locked
>into a vendor, you certainly don't want to lock any vendors out, either.

Economical? Let's be serious here. Unless you are getting some
TREMENDOUS knockoff, a uVax II or a Vaxstation still costs a pretty
penny to get comparable performance to any of an arbitrarily large
number of other machines. It's very much like IBM -- the technology
may not be fast and flashy, but it'll be there tomorrow still plugging
away -- kind of like the difference between a Porsche 944 turbo and a
Ford Fairlane.

Ack.



-- 
David Boyes         | ARPA: 556%OREGON1.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Systems Division    | BITNET: 556@OREGON1
UO Computing Center | UUCP: dboyes@uoregon.UUCP
'How long d'ya think it'll be before just us oldtimers remember WISCVM?'