2.2 Still an Option?

Thread View: comp.sys.next.hardware

2 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

2 total messages Started by Eric Scott Boltz Fri, 09 Oct 1992 21:04

#810

Author: Eric Scott Boltz
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1992 21:04

29 lines
1612 bytes

With all this talk of how slow 3.0 is, I am getting very concerned
about my planned purchase of a NSTC. I had an 030 cube running 1.0,
and upgraded to an 040 running 2.1 so I am deathly scared of winding
up with a SLOW interface again. Hell, everyone here wants me to get
a Sun IPX and a slow interface would start an endless stream of 
"wow, my IPX is much faster" comments.

Anyway, how easy would it be to get 2.2 up and running on a new 
machine? Will 2.2 support ADB? 

Maybe I should just get the IPX; after all a great OS isn't so great
if you're frustrated by its (lack of) speed and tired of explaining
it to Sun freaks.

I am also concerned about disk throughput. One poster suggested the NeXT
would only support something like 400kB/sec on the SCSI. WHAT?!
IS THIS TRUE? Good thing they put a SCSI-2 connector back there so
I can hook up and 10MB/sec disk only to have it trickle data...

I want NeXTstep back on my desk, but I cannot afford to sink many
thousands of dollars into a slow system.

Eric S. Boltz
Materials Research Engineer
NIST Boulder Labs.
eboltz@srv430.bldr.nist.gov
eboltz@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (non-resident Hopkins graduate student)

Re: 2.2 Still an Option?

#813

Author: David Lemson
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1992 22:13

32 lines
2027 bytes

eboltz@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Eric Scott Boltz) writes:

>With all this talk of how slow 3.0 is, I am getting very concerned
>about my planned purchase of a NSTC. I had an 030 cube running 1.0,
>and upgraded to an 040 running 2.1 so I am deathly scared of winding
>up with a SLOW interface again. Hell, everyone here wants me to get
>a Sun IPX and a slow interface would start an endless stream of 
>"wow, my IPX is much faster" comments.
I highly doubt that you would ever find that a NeXT running 3.0 with
anymore than 16 MB is slower than an IPX running OpenLook 3.0.

>Anyway, how easy would it be to get 2.2 up and running on a new 
>machine? Will 2.2 support ADB? 
The latest announcement stated that you need 3.0 to support ADB on
any hardware.
But, 2.2 would work with a Turbo, since that's what I ran all last
summer on a Turbo where I worked. You'd have to make sure to buy the
old-style monitor and old-style sound box and starting point kits so
you get the old-style keyboard.

>Maybe I should just get the IPX; after all a great OS isn't so great
>if you're frustrated by its (lack of) speed and tired of explaining
>it to Sun freaks.
If you seriously think that OpenLook is a more productive
environment, then I'd say you haven't had to use it for very long.
(IMHO, as a biased opinion)

-- 
David Lemson                                                (217) 244-1205
University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin
Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu                UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson 
NeXTMail accepted                                  BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads