🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec26.003022.25532@bilver.uucp> wbeebe@bilver.uucp (Bill Beebe) writes:
> >Now I won't say I was happy with the performance on the 286, but the current
> >systems with moderately old 386es are adequate, and our 486 box screams.

> Maybe I *really* am dumber than a box of dirt, but why, in this day of
> networking, would anyone do team development on a single box when it would
> appear that team development on networked single-user boxes would be a lot
> more efficient?

Because team development on networked multiuser boxes is better than either.
Not everyone needs 27 MIPS full time. You can do low-impact stuff on shared
boxes, and have database and compile servers for big builds. Because a 386
with an adequate bus underneath is is plenty fast for typical software
development tasks, even multiuser. Because distributed computing means that
some system you've never heard of can stop you dead. Because we don't have
enough money to buy the sort of workstation we'd like for every developer,
but we've got a perfectly adequate network of Xenix boxes already. Because
the tools we need aren't available on UNIX, but are available on Xenix, and
multiuser development on DOS is a joke. Lots of reasons.

> Why do we still need multi-user boxes except to support obsolete business
> practices?

Because they work?

Sure, we're moving over to workstations, but it's going to take time.
-- 
Peter da Silva                                            `-_-'
Ferranti International Controls Corporation                'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012 USA
+1 713 274 5180                            "Zure otsoa besarkatu al duzu gaur?"