From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Distributed Systems
Date: 14 Aug 92 01:15:06 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Aug12.220152.20876@microsoft.com>, petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Sk
elly) writes:
>In article <-159819990@hpopd.pwd.hp.com> yuk@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Yuk Lun Chan) wr
ites:
>>>comp.os.os2.advocacy / petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) /  3:06 am  Aug  8,
 1992 /
>>>In article <-159819992@hpopd.pwd.hp.com> yuk@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Yuk Lun Chan)
writes:
>>>>One small question about multi-user in NT. Can I plug a dump terminal to the
>>>>back of the whatever machine running NT. If a PC has 4 com ports, then four
>>>>users can log on concurrently. I know there is some card allows a PC have
>>>>up to 32 ports (They are running under DR ConcurrentDOS).
>>>>
>>>>Yuk
>>
>>>If there is a "server" program running to connect "shells" up the the term
>>>ports, then yes.  Would you find this useful?  What apps would you run
>>>in these terminals?
>>
>>Simple accounting, wordprocessing, education or data input etc.
>
>Simple accounting: use an accounting book.  Keep it in a filing cabinet.
>wordprocessing: use a typewriter.
>education: use teachers
>data input: what kind?
>
>Oh, wait, you wanted to use Just enough technology to make your point.
>
>Well, I'd like to use technology a little more advanced.  286 machines
>are getting quite cheap these days.  They run windows.  Now your workforce
>would be allowed to use WYSWIG word processing, have a far better UI
>in their word processing, and so on.  Education, now you can use multimedia.

You know as well as I do that a 286 doesn't run Windows very well.  You need
at least a 386sx to get to the good stuff.  Also, how many schools do you know
of that have significant amounts of multimedia equipment?  Sound boards and
speakers cost money, and aren't all that practical.  Also, you
don't need NT for this, so where is the advantage?  You also don't need NT, or
even Windows for WYSIWIG so even that is pointless.  You haven't listed
anything that can't and isn't already being done without Windows and NT.

>
>
>>
>>>I suspect that if this is a really useful mode of interaction, someone,
>>>maybe MS, will come up with this server.  Frankly, I wouldn't think
>>>you would find this archaic mode of operation useful in NT.  Kind of
>>>like having front panel switches on your UNIX box.
>>
>>I have seen a lot of small business using dump terminals with a few Unix
>>box. In current stage, they don't need window like applications. And you
>>know, dump terminal (ok, with vt200, wyse emulation) are very cheap. How
>>much for a Unix box + a few com cards + 100 dump terminals and
>>NT box + 100 Lan cards + 100 Lan license + 100 PCs (+ 100 windows) ?
>
>A few com cards, try 100.  yeuch.
>How much are dumb terminals.  As I said, 286 boxes are quite cheap also.
>Lan cards are very cheap.  100 LAN licenses are cheap.
>So the net cost will be a bit more, the net ability of the system, though,
>will be a whole lot more!!!

Not if you use the same hardware.  You can use all the stuff you mention here
with UNIX.  Where is the increased funtionality?

>
>You give a UNIX system, which will be MAXED out in use.  The users won't be
>able to use anything more complecated.  What if the UNIX box goes down.
>For every hour it is down, you loose 100 man hours of work.

FUD.  The same thing happens when an NT server goes down.  You are going to
loose some work no matter what.  Also there is no reason you can't use PC's as
terminals with UNIX.

>
>With the NT system, You can use most advanced Windows software as it comes
>out.  And when the main box goes down, everyone can continue to work locally.
>

286's are cheap, but they cannot use anything close to the most advanced
software.  Also, what precludes using 286s, 386s or whatever, with a UNIX
system?  The answer is nothing.  You can also continue your work locally with
UNIX.  Where is the advantage that NT has with this?  NT really is about the
same in power. It does some things in what might be considered a slicker fashion
but not with any increased funtionality.  This all sounds like a lot of hype.
I want to see actual advantages not things that I can already do.  I know NT
has some, so let's hear about them, not meaningless comparisons with
things that the current systems handle quite easily.
>

>petesk@microsoftc.om
>My Opinions...
>


                                                    Stacy John Behrens
                                                    *===)-------------