Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!crunchyfrog!dhsu
From: dhsu@crunchyfrog.Sun.COM (David Hsu)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: PaRITY (was NeXT Memory - No Error Checking or Parity !)
Keywords: Memory,errors,parity
Message-ID: <76443@sun.uucp>
Date: 7 Nov 88 21:56:19 GMT
References: <549@gt-eedsp.UUCP> <7493@well.UUCP> <Nov.2.10.35.53.1988.1589@hardees.rutgers.edu> <31812@bbn.COM> <17548@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> <1868@eos.UUCP>
Sender: news@sun.uucp
Reply-To: dhsu@sun.UUCP (David Hsu)
Organization: Beer-Swilling Technogeek Research Institute
Lines: 21

In article <1868@eos.UUCP> lyman@eos.UUCP (Lyman Taylor) writes:
>In article <17548@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> casey@cs.ucla.edu (Casey Leedom) writes:
>>	o Going with the Sony optical disk instead of the Canon because
>
>	This would not be minor.  One of the "mainframe" VLSI chips serves 
>	as a disk controller for the op drive.  This is why NeXT can sell the 
>	WHOLE cube for a couple thousand $ more the the Sony Drive.  
>	( sony drive 4 or 5 thousand  :  Cube 6500 )
>	{ This info comes from a NeXT Rep I heard last Wed. at Stanford }

I don't buy it.  As I recall, the Canon drive itself was meant to sell for
$6000 anyway before Jobs bargained the hell out of them.  Do you really mean
to say that the controller design makes up the difference between that and
the (possibly low) $1495 Unix World quotes for a second optical drive?

-dave

David Hsu
dhsu@sun.com			<standard disclaimer>

"I feel better already knowing that Sherlock Holmes is British."