[rescue] Perverse Question

[Dave McGuire]

On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 2:52PM -0500, Robert Novak wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Jonathan C. Patschke wrote:
>
>>  On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Dave McGuire wrote:
>>
>>  >    Actually I think it's more like "sold-on-marketing PC bigot who 
>> has no
>>  > technical defense for his position". ;)
>>
>>  I actually thought he was talking about a U5 before he let us in on 
>> it.
>>  Very few PCs back then had a whole 256k of cache. ;)
>
> And very few of them had PGX8 video too. :) (or at least few called 
> them
> PGX8, that I saw....)
>
> You are correct, Jonathan. The machine in question was one of the first 
> 8
> Ultra 5 270s I ordered for my workgroup at Nortel. Compared to the 
> Ultra
> 1s and SS5s most of my group was using at the time, they FLEW. I had
> developers kissing my feet when I'd bring one to their cube. Building
> release versions of switch code for our product went from several hours 
> to
> under an hour, as I recall, and a 2-3 module partial rebuild could be 
> done
> in a quarter hour or less (depending on which modules the developer had
> checked out). No changes to the build environment except replacing the 
> nfs
> client workstation where the builds were being done.
>
> But maybe an Ultra 5 is a PC. I know it has PC-type components in it,
> sure. And maybe the fact that the Ultra 5 I mentioned ran five years 
> with
> only one (software-related disk-fillup) hiccup is PC-bigot marketing.

   I don't think anyone here is fooled...but just in case, again I will 
point out that this is NOT what I was talking about.

    -Dave