Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!ucla-cs!admin.cognet.ucla.edu!casey
From: casey@admin.cognet.ucla.edu (Casey Leedom)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: PaRITY (was NeXT Memory - No Error Checking or Parity !)
Keywords: Memory,errors,parity
Message-ID: <17548@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Date: 4 Nov 88 01:05:42 GMT
References: <549@gt-eedsp.UUCP> <7493@well.UUCP> <Nov.2.10.35.53.1988.1589@hardees.rutgers.edu> <31812@bbn.COM>
Sender: news@CS.UCLA.EDU
Reply-To: casey@cs.ucla.edu (Casey Leedom)
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Program
Lines: 30

| From: jr@bbn.com (John Robinson)
| 
| I agree that parity/edac ought to be available, and it'll probably come
| along eventually by third party or whatever.

  Uh, how are you going to add parity or ecc on as a third party option?

  Personally, I don't think that it's too late to get some minor
redesigns into the machine before it hits the floor next Spring.  I think
that putting parity on the memory is a top priority along those lines.  I
don't think that ecc is necessary - I just want to know within a
reasonable degree of confidence that my data is correct.

  Other items might be:

	o Going with the Sony optical disk instead of the Canon because
	  of its higher performance and conformance to ANSI standards
	  (anyone have any data on the storage capacity of the Sony
	  disk?).

	o Putting a better input A/D system on it, say 16 bits, so we can
	  do sound sampling for use in synthesis projects (I have
	  absolutely no objects to the voice-mail, or any other voice
	  communication software truncating this down to 8 bits to save
	  on storage).

I view these as features I'd really like to see.  I view memory parity as
a must.

Casey