Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!ucsd!nosc!humu!uhccux!bmartin
From: bmartin@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Brian Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: NeXt Performance/Price
Keywords: SAS, IBM
Message-ID: <3736@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Date: 12 Apr 89 11:42:32 GMT
References: <2648@tank.uchicago.edu> <56267@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> <16912@cup.portal.com> <16964@cup.portal.com> <8357@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: bmartin@uhccux.UUCP (Brian Martin)
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Hawaii
Lines: 21

In article <8357@polya.Stanford.EDU> shap@polya.Stanford.EDU (Jonathan S. Shapiro) writes:
>In article <16964@cup.portal.com> BruceH@cup.portal.com (Bruce Robert Henderson) writes:
>>Does anyone out there on the mac see any need for SAS or EMACS???
>>NO WAY!
>

A little over a year ago the cancer research center decided they needed
to purchase a computer.  The staff biostatistician insisted that SAS
was the only statistical software that could meet his needs, and that
an IBM mainframe was the only available environment in which SAS would
run.  Thus, they spent over $100,000 on an IBM 9370, a "mainframe" with
8MB RAM,  multiple DMA channels with intelligent I/O processors (sound
familiar?), a 1600bpi tape drive, and 1.6GB disk space. They also hired a
staff of five programmers to run their SAS software!

They just decided to spend an additional $100,000 adding additional
disk storage and RAM onto their system. When I suggested that they look
at the new crop of workstations on the market, they asked what a
workstation was...

  -- Brian