NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/comp/sys/sun/hardware/5752

Text File | 1992-11-19 | 3.6 KB | 71 lines

Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.hardware
Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!destroyer!gumby!wupost!darwin.sura.net!eng.ufl.edu!alpha.ee.ufl.edu!jon
From: [e-mail] (Jon Mellott)
Subject: Re: SPARCClassic vs. 486
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet Diskhog System)
Organization: EE Dept at UF
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 15:44:46 GMT
Lines: 59

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bill Putney) writes:
|> In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Larry Meadows) writes:
|> >I agree that the prices are competitive between sparc and 486 systems,
|> >but I think the dearth of user-level software is still a problem.  Does
|> >anyone have info on cost of things like Lotus, Microsoft Word (if available),
|> >accounting software, etc. for sparcs vs. PCs.
|> >
|> >Of course, Macs are better anyway :-).
|> >--
|> >Larry Meadows        The Portland Group
|> >[e-mail]
|>
|> On the software I have found (Lotus 123, WordPerfect, ...) software vendors
|> are pricing it very close to their windows prices.  The additional benefit
|> is that some are now supporting the license server so that you only need to
|> buy the number of licenses that will be in simultaneous use.  Of course if
|> you're using this at home that may not be as big a drawing card.
|>
Most medium to large size enterprises are running networks, and of those that
I've seen, the major apps are run off of file servers. Furthermore PC file
servers can keep track of the number of seats of a package in use. Therefore,
I don't see that the license server is a big draw.

|> The other item for consideration is that if you think you're going to want to
|> use Windows NT ("... may be almost as good as unix.") when (if) it gets here
|> there are noises being made that it is taylored to run on fast '586 and RICS
|> (Sparc) systems.                       ^^^^^^^^                         ^^^^
|>
I've ran the July release of NT on a 386-20 with no cache and it ran fine.
Not stellar, but about what you would expect for a 386-20. The 386-20 would
be adequate for word processing and the like. MS even has 386SX-16's in its
compatibility list, and people who've seen NT on SX's say it isn't too bad.

To the point: NT is as responsive on my 386-33 as Openwin2 is on my SPARC ELC --
if not more so. NT is also a lot closer than many people think. In my experience
it has been rock solid. There are still some relatively minor problems, but
they should be cleaned up before the end of 2Q93. Also (and I'll bet you didn't
know this) you can purchase real commercial apps *right now* for NT.
They're mostly programming products, but I think that says an awful lot about
the state of NT.

BTW, I suspect that NT will become significant in higher education.
Imagine: a network ready OS with decent security (i.e., it gets along well
in a lab environment, unlike the current PC OS's -- except Unix on PC),
all of your favorite apps (Word for Win, WordPerfect, Lotus 123, Excel,
CorelDRAW!), nice programming environment (POSIX .1 compatibility, full suite
of GNU software shipping *now* for NT -- gcc, bash, emacs, elvis, bison, flex,
and the like), and all on cheap hardware.

Yes, NT is not Unix -- I won't be running my EDA tools on NT anytime soon,
but for most of the things that most people do, NT is more than adequate.

Also, the current list of processors supported by NT is x86, MIPS R4000,
and DEC Alpha.

Jon Mellott
High Speed Digital Architecture Laboratory
University of Florida
([e-mail])