Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!oodis01!uplherc!utah-gr!utah-cs!cetron
From: cetron@utah-cs.UUCP (Edward J Cetron)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: Re:  Pacer vs. Alisa
Message-ID: <5462@utah-cs.UUCP>
Date: 2 May 88 16:18:58 GMT
References: <5456@utah-cs.UUCP> <1396*kenw@noah.arc.cdn>
Reply-To: cetron@cs.utah.edu.UUCP (Edward J Cetron)
Organization: Center for Engineering Design, Univ of Utah
Lines: 22

In article <1396*kenw@noah.arc.cdn> kenw@noah.arc.CDN (Ken Wallewein) writes:
>
>  Nope. Pacer uses the standard Apple client software, too, exactly as it
>comes from Apple. What's more, Pacer's _server_ software on VMS uses the VMS
>_NATIVE_ file structure, as opposed to those big virtual disks files that
>Alias uses. This provides significant advantages in terms of performance, user
>interface, and security.

	This is very bizarre? If the above is true, then:

	1. why is Pacer trying to sell use SEPARATE client software. (at
		significant cost to us)

	2. Why does Pacer discuss tcp/ip style sockets when explaining why
		their software conflicts with Telnet.

	3. Why does my version of Alisashare work just fine with the NATIVE
		VMS file structure....

I always new Canada was different :-)

-ed
cetron@cs.utah.edu