Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!think!ames!lll-tis!mordor!sri-spam!sri-unix!garth!walter
From: walter@garth.UUCP (Walter Bays)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: FORTRAN Horror
Message-ID: <594@garth.UUCP>
Date: 8 Apr 88 18:19:21 GMT
References: <1135@pembina.UUCP> <46500011@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <6630@ames.arpa> <538@spectrix.UUCP>
Reply-To: walter@garth.UUCP (Walter Bays)
Organization: INTERGRAPH (APD) -- Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 22
Summary: A remark off the subject of a good note.

In article <538@spectrix.UUCP> clewis@spectrix.UUCP (Chris Lewis) writes:
>In article <6630@ames.arpa> lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Hugh LaMaster) writes:
>	IBM PC's or clones are better for running LOTUS than a Sun
>Of course!  Lotus doesn't run on a Sun....

Qcalc probably runs on lots of UN*X boxes, uses the same data files,
and has the same look-and-feel (direct flames to the "Apple vs. The
World" topic on comp.sys.mac, please :-) But if you'd like it to run
much slower on the same workstation, we, Sun, Apple, and others have
80386 (or 286) co-processors you can run Lotus on.

Seriously, though, if you have ordinary sized worksheets, or don't mind
getting a cup of coffee while it recalculates, generic AT's are certainly
cheaper.
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any similarities between my opinions and those of the
person who signs my paychecks is purely coincidental.
E-Mail route: ...!pyramid!garth!walter
USPS: Intergraph APD, 2400 Geng Road, Palo Alto, California 94303
Phone: (415) 852-2384
------------------------------------------------------------------------------