Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cfa!ward From: ward@cfa.harvard.EDU (Steve Ward) Newsgroups: comp.os.vms Subject: Re: Help us defend against VMS! Message-ID: <914@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU> Date: 10 Mar 88 18:51:27 GMT References: <2235@bsu-cs.UUCP> <892@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU> <20403@bu-cs.BU.EDU> <1663@uoregon.UUCP> Organization: Harvard-Smithsonian Ctr. for Astrophysics Lines: 83 Summary: yes...economical... In article <1663@uoregon.UUCP>, dboyes@uoregon.UUCP (David Boyes) writes: > 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 Well, we do get good prices from DEC. As I said, a VS2000 with a one year onsite maint. warranty starts about $3300 and tops about $10K (color, 6MB, RD54,etc) with both VMS/Ultrix licenses and licenses for another dozen VMS software products, or so. Last year we configured some VAXStation II's with 16MB of memory, Ethernet, VMS/DECnet/Fortran, etc. and Excelan TCP/IP, 1.2 Gigabyte of MAXTOR disks for under $25K each. The machines included 16-user VMS licenses, which is my existing major complaint against DEC. DEC will not sell add-on multiuser VMS licenses for VAXStations anymore. I can buy VAXStation II's starting at $10K with all the software I mentioned for the VS2000's included, but no longer can get the VM