Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu!rjc
From: rjc@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell)
Subject: Re: A2500 vs. A3000
Message-ID: <1991Apr18.220939.4028@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Sender: news@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu
Organization: The Internet
References: <20677@cbmvax.commodore.com> <41360@cup.portal.com> <1991Apr18.185532.9783@motaus.sps.mot.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 91 22:09:39 GMT
Lines: 82

In article <1991Apr18.185532.9783@motaus.sps.mot.com> skipper@motaus.sps.mot.com (Skipper Smith) writes:
>Dana, I agree with just about everything you say, but a some of it just     
>doesn't work.
>
>In article <41360@cup.portal.com> FelineGrace@cup.portal.com (Dana B Bourgeois) writes:
>>Scott suggests that if you need a "ms-dos powerhouse" (!) then you
>>should look at a PC clone and that CBM would gladly sell you one.
>>I think that is an excellent marketing policy and should be shouted
>>from the rooftops!  But ah.....not until there is a very fast, very
>>cheap, very easy-to-set-up, and very integrated means of hooking the
>>two types of machines together.  I suggest that all PC clones from CBM
>>come standard with SCSI, that both the Amiga DOS and PC DOS handle
>>communication over the SCSI bus, that utilities be included with the
>>machines to network *ALL* machines made by CBM together (can you say
>>'NFS'?) in the same type of Operating-Supported way that Apple's
>>Macs can be connected (only faster! :-)  ).  Here is equipment that
>>I would buy because I have a need for it.  And I haven't bought much
>>CBM equipment lately because it doesn't meet my needs at home or at work.
>>I think the trade rags would eat it up.  There'd be lots of talk about
>>it.  And I think the major pieces are already in place.  Rigid disk
>>blocks.  A solid SCSI design.  TCP/IP and NFS software.  Looks to me
>>like the R&D is done, some redesign to a few PCB is needed and then
>>lots of testing.  Say an optional software/hardware package available
>>in '92 with full hardware/OS support by next generation of machine/OS?
>>Say sometime in '93?  Comments?  
>>
>>Dana Bourgeois @ cup.portal.com
>
>Your main comment that I have a problem with is "...very fast, very cheap,
>very easy-to-set-up..." and then you go on to compare the situation to         
>Appletalk.  First of all, Appletalk is anything but fast.  Second, it is 
>connecting machines that for all intents and purposes are identicle.  How can
>you compare this to a situation where you are trying to tie together extremely
>dissimilar machines of, in the PC's case, unknown capability (no real standards
>over there)- Big/Little endian byte ordering is just the beginning of the 
>nightmare.  TCP/IP is good, but it is expensive and will remain so for quite
>some time, and besides, the A500 will probably never have access to TCP/IP
>(the only reason why I add that in is due to AppleTalk working on ALL Macs).
>I would like to see some form of generic networking that is less than $100/unit
>to turn the numerous Amiga's, a PC or two, and a VME system (or two) into one
>networked unit, but I don't expect to see it (at that pricepoint or below) in
>'93 and I don't expect to see it by '95, either.
> 


 
    It's already here. It's called Parnet/Sernet. With NET: you can
mount remote filesystems and use them locally. Add in dnet and you
can open multiple shells on remote machines, and print files
remotely. DNET really isn't needed except Software Distillery hasn't
fixed the problem of opening CON: windows and other handlers remotely.
Parnet gets up to 28k/sec xfer using only a parallel cable. Once
Parnet is fixed and updated, you should be able to do stuff like:

  newshell net:john's amiga/con/'0/0/660/200/My remote shell/c'

(Note: this is not possible now, but I remember hearing that NET: is
going to eventually support multiple nodes by name, and SANA.
 BTW, there's nothing inherent that makes NET: only run on a parallel
cables. You can easily make it run over any medium as long as you
provide a low-level protocol for that device.
 I wish someone would make a socket.library that emulates BSD sockets
either locally, or as channels on dnet/parnet/sernet.)

  Parnet isn't the answer to everything, but it sure is cheap(free).
Something like AmigaNET(tm) is much more desirable. AmigaNET
has a 10 Megabaud xfer rate, allows every Amiga on the net to be a client
and server, shares HDs/floppies/RAM disks/serial ports/parallel ports/printers.
AmigaNET can allow any Amiga to DMA ram directly into another (nice).
I think AmigaNET goes by a different name now.
>
>-- 
>Skipper Smith                             | skipper@motaus.sps.mot.com
>Motorola Technical Training               | 8945 Guilford Rd  Ste 145  
>All opinions are my own, not my employers | Columbia, MD 21046


--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu   |   //  The opinions expressed here do not in any way  |
| uunet!tnc!m0023      | \X/   reflect the views of my self.                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
