🚀 go-pugleaf

Kevin Handy <k...@srv.net> wrote in article <5phc1j$4...@mars.hyperk.com>...
> In article <33BBA049...@sanlam.co.za>, Louwtji...@sanlam.co.za

> says...
> >
> >steve wolfe wrote:
> >
> >> Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879 wrote:
> >> I agree, but I think another major advantage of mainframes is
> >> concurrency. We have 35,000 users with sub second response time (plus
> >> the 3 second satellite transmission time that we can not control). PC
> >> servers can't handle that concurrency.
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >PC Servers... ? How can you compare a $20000 doller machine with a $XXXX
> >million dollar machine ?
> >
> >
> Easily. The $XXXX million dollar machine gets the job done with
> the needed response time. The $20000 doller PC can't.
> 
> Use the right machine for the job. You won't see mainframes used
> at home to play Doom, or PC's in the office serving 35,000 users.
> The machines are targeted for different purposes.
> 
> 
Depends on the job.  Cascading Client Servers response time
rivals that of any MainFrame/Dumb Terminal model.  However,
is what the users are trying to access is a multi-million record
database, nothing short of multiple main-frames could handle
the traffic.

Games at home, maybe not.  But didn't I read somehere that
Wayne Ratlief developed Vulcan to keep track of his betting
pools on a JPL mainframe.  Vulcan became dBase II.

The "power" of a desktop is the ability of an end user to
modify an app...on the spot to exactly meet a need.  This
explains the almost univeral use of word processing programs
on desktops.