🚀 go-pugleaf

I sent out a mini survey on the network feasibility issue with regard to
DECnet and MS Windows, a specifically asked in my question of Pathwork in
comparison to Novell netware.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The conclusion from the respondents are that Pathwork should perform quite
reasonable provided the system is not overloaded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Below is details you may want to skip

Out of the 10 people responded, only 1 advice was negative to Pathwork, the
rests are either neutral or in favor of Pathwork.
I have summed up all the responds that I got below, and mails that I
received is available on request.  Below is summary of individual's mail that
I received up to date.

(1)======================================================================
Nick Ruggiero, GRO Science Support Center, NASA/GSFC Code 668.1
   Pathwork provides many features and in his opinion "is an excellent package",
     both on PC and on MAC.

(2)======================================================================
gladstog@rnprin.DNET.roche.com,
Gary Gladstone
Senior Programmer/Analyst
Hoffmann-La Roche
340 Kingsland St (bldg 85/3)
Nutley NJ 07110-1199 
 Gary provides a list comparing Novell/Pathwork
   Pathwork is strong in administrative support.
   Initial cost is lower for Novell, but Pathwork needs no additional purchases of
     servers to upgrade. Pathwork also support larger and faster disks (does not
     mention if they are more expensive. Ling)
   Novell performs better for 10 to 15 users, but Pathwork does not degrade much
     above 15 users while Novell does.
   Pathwork supports Ethernet/ASYNC connection to VAX.
   Novell needs less PC memory than Pathwork.
   Pathwork support central administrative backup, and need no individual user's
     intervention for individual user's local backup.
   Pathwork can support PC and MAC users to share files.


(3)======================================================================
Alistair Grant
Internet:     alistair@mits.com.au
   Alistair indicates that it is not worth the extra investment for current VAX or 
     Ultrix user to go for the Novell, while Pathwork does have adequate support 
     for MS Windows.

(4)======================================================================
 Umberto Tachinardi, MD
 Medical Informatics Division / Heart Institute
 Sao Paulo University Medical School
 Voice: 55 11 881-7558      FAX: 55 11 282-2354
 E-Mail: tachinardi@incor.hc.usp.br

  Umberto stress that installation requires some work, and should ask (and push) for
    DEC for technical assistance. 
  In general, he is quite happy with the Pathwork and MS Windows combination.
koh@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com (Koh)

(5)======================================================================
Cody Koh. (of Honeywell Air Transport Systems Division )
koh@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com (Koh)
  Koh suggests a purely PC environment (that is, site with no DEC system) can 
     benefit more with Novell.
  He also agrees that Pathwork is quite stable with MS Windows and in
    general does not have any problem with the combination (which his
    company is currently using).
  He mentions DEC support and price tag are weak points.

(6)======================================================================
Mark Montanez, System Manager AHEC, (303)556-2409
MONTANEZM@AHECAS.Colorado.EDU

  Mark's IS department has both Pathwork and Novell running.
  Novell is faster with light load (~10 users), but degrade fast with more users. 
  Pathwork does not degrade even under heavy load (15 users or more).
  Pathwork provides more support (to VMS, email, backup)
  Pathwork is more memory hungry than Novell.
  He prefers Pathwork than Novell solution.

(7)======================================================================
Bryan Petty
Univeristy of Pittsburgh
Graduate Telecom Student/Slave 
bjpst5+@pitt.edu

  Bryan suggests Pathwork is better for organizations that already has DEC
    system installed.
  He also advices that Pathwork run on top of TCP/IP uses less memory than
    DECnet.  However, both DECnet and TCP/IP implementation run well for 
    Pathwork.

(8)======================================================================
 Michael J. O'Connor           |  Internet:  mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com
 Ford Motor Company, OPEO      |  UUCP:      ...!{backbone}!fmsrl7!mjo
 20000 Rotunda, Bldg. 1-3001   |  Phone:     +1 (313) 248-1260
 Dearborn, MI  48121           |  Fax:       +1 (313) 323-6277

  Michael says Pathwork is an "ill-performing clone" of MicroSoft LAN Manager,
    and should be avoided.  He does not give additional reasonings.

(9)======================================================================
Alain Martineau
Automatismes, Hydro-Quebec
11e etage, Tour de l'est
Complexe Desjardins
CP 10000
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
H5B 1H7
martineau@macmartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca

  Alain's company is using a 3100 dedicated to serve as a Pathwork server, and
    is quite happy with it.
  He suggests that the reasons that Pathwork does not perform well may be due to
    the system being overloaded heavily.

(10)======================================================================
John W. Cox, Manager
Systems and Technology Projects      FAX: (408) 742-6428
Lockheed Missiles & Space Company
1111 Lockheed Way B573 4802          Internet: COX@OFFICE.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3504

 Pathworks seems to work well with PCs & MACs for file and print services.
 It cost less for a VAX shop to go for Pathwork.

======================================================================
 Compile and summarized by Ling Siu Shian 1992/12/17
 Many thanks for all that responded.

 Wish all of you have a nice and 
   peaceful holiday and prosperous new year ahead.