🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1989Dec18.174644.24333@ug.cs.dal.ca> smith@ug.cs.dal.ca.UUCP (Sean Smith) writes:
>In article <18222@netnews.upenn.edu> meuchen@grad2.cis.upenn.edu (Paul Eric Menchen) writes:
>>Who said most used meant best?  Buy the way, Macs can run UNIX too,
>>including X-Windows and everything else.  Can your IBM do that?
>
>	Yep.  If I had a 386.  Will all Macs run UNIX?
>
>I know - I work in an
>area where we have networks of both PC's and Macs.  And the Macs are slower
>by a long shot.  Want to bring up Excel?  Double click in the icon and wait
>1 minute (literally - when the system's loaded down).  On the PC network?  
>Type in EXCEL and wait about 20 seconds, if that.  No matter if the system's
>near full or what.

I also work in a lab with IBMs and MACs.  Both are running on the same
network, and use the same drives and printers.  Both run similar software,
both have similar interfaces, and the MACs cost twice as much.  The Mac
side of the network is USUALLY broken, with print queues stacking up, and
the printers silent, or there are problems launching applications from the
servers.

One day I had this problem (47 jobs in the queue on the Image Writer, and
... silence).  I called upstairs about the problem and down came a test print
which worked perfectly . . . I call back to find out what they did, and I am
told that the test print came from the IBM side of the net!

We NEVER have problems with the IBM side of the net, unless the problems are
NETWORK-WIDE.

-- 
----- <Jeff Beardsley> --------------------- <jbeard@dept.csci.unt.edu> -----
Any similarity between my opinions and the opinion of any other person, 
living or dead, is purely coincidental.