Xref: utzoo comp.arch:6817 comp.misc:3915
Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!syntron!jtsv16!uunet!ncc!lyndon@nexus.ca
From: lyndon@nexus.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.misc
Subject: Re: Cost of floptical s/w distribution
Message-ID: <10509@ncc.Nexus.CA>
Date: 25 Oct 88 03:48:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: ncc.10509
References: <8300@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> <757@umbio.MIAMI.EDU> <1517@maccs.McMaster.CA> <10508@ncc.Nexus.CA> <74239@sun.uucp>
Sender: lyndon@ncc.Nexus.CA
Reply-To: lyndon@nexus.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Followup-To: comp.misc
Organization: Nexus Computing Inc.
Lines: 23
In-reply-to: swilson%thetone@Sun.COM (Scott Wilson)

In article <74239@sun.uucp>, swilson%thetone (Scott Wilson) writes:

>Maybe the way to look at it is "how many $6500 machines distribute
>software on $50 medium."  To say that "most" software currently ships
>on QIC tapes is just false unless were talking about workstations
>only.

Sorry, I thought it would be clear from the context of my reply;
Yes, I am addressing the workstation market.

Just to prove a point, I see Sun charges the same price for QIC
and half inch tape distributions of SunOS, even though the "cost"
of half inch tape is roughly half that of QIC (based on SunOS 3.5
which was 4? QIC and 3? 1/2 in.)

My point is the media costs tend to get buried in overall "handling"
charge (e.g. FrameMaker charges CAN$150 for "media" when shipping
a single QIC tape).

[ This has nothing to do with comp.arch. Follow-ups to comp.misc. ]

--lyndon
--