🚀 go-pugleaf

In article 5777@eddie.MIT.EDU, Zigurd Mednieks replied with some
suggestions on my posting concerning faster networks for the Macintosh.
He gives some cost comparisons between an Appletalk network and a
hypothetical Ethernet Macintosh network, and comes up with the
solution that it is better to use SE's with 20M hard disks networked
using PhoneNet for file sharing/printer purposes rather than using a
larger file server on a faster network.

While I agree with the use of PhoneNet instead of Appletalk cabling,
I don't think his solution is very well suited to a university environment.
We want to provide our users with a variety of software packages for
doing the usual wordprocessing, graphics, programming, etc type of
applications.  With a shared hard disk, the programs can all be put
on the server and made available to users via appropriate network
commands.  In my opinion, it is impossible to manage software on
20 different hard disks and keep the machines always functional.
Users fill untended hard disks very rapidly, and often delete things that
shouldn't be deleted.  It would certainly provide the best performance,
but by far the worst management headaches.

We have a 60 station IBM network here at Acadia.  It uses Arcnet/Coax
cabling and has 3 file servers with 60Megs each (not enough).  Students
keep their work on floppies and can access any software they are permitted
to by the network manager.  The hard disks are safe from student abuse
since they only have read permission for most of the programs.

Is Apple/Macintoshes that far behind in networking that a similar
approach couldn't be achieved with 20 to 30 Mac's, or even more
as campus wide networks become more common?  I love my Mac SE (with HD),
but as far as networking is concerned, Mac's seem to have a long
way to go.


UUCP:      {seismo|watmath|utai|garfield}!dalcs!aucs!Paul
BITNET:    {Paul|phs}@Acadia
Internet:  {Paul|phs}%Acadia.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
PHONEnet:  (902) 542-2201x587