286 serial port woes

[Tim Evans]

In article <11899 at netsys.COM>, len at netsys.COM (Len Rose) writes:
> 
> While I generally would have to agree that memory is at the
> heart of my problems with V/AT,it speaks volumes of the actual
> quality of their port. I have run Unix on some pretty lame
> hardware configurations on many different systems and none
> performed this badly. Plus, there is serious trouble with the
> serial drivers.. I am sure this has been thrashed to death here
> previously so I won't add anything else. Too bad that SCO Xenix
> has proven itself superior in all respects. I am decidely in
> the System V camp , and refuse to use anything else on the
> mini's we have here.
> 
I'm a uPort user, too (2.4), but it appears that this and other
similar messages have got it right.  You simply _must_ have large
amounts of RAM to run uPort succesfully on an AT.  For those who
are considering 286 *NIX implementations for general office-type
work (*N*O*T* for software development, though), take a look at
VenturCom's Venix.  At the Social Security Administration, we run
standard old 6-mhz AT's, with 1 meg RAM, for office automation 
purposes and they serve 2 users real well for most purposes.

Venix 286 has serious problems when it comes to software development
(even though the package is fully bundled, with software development
and text-processing packages), and, at 1 meg, heavy use of our
spreadsheet (Tactician) with large spreadsheets tends to drag them
down real quickly.  Nevertheless, for general word-processing and
other standard office tasks, Venix works real well.

Now, getting support from VenturCom or its VAR's, and software
applications that run on it is another question.  VenturCom is
a very small company and ports to it are far and few between.


-- 
UUCP:  ...!{rutgers|ames|uunet}!mimsy!aplcen!wb3ffv!fallst!tkevans
INTERNET:  tkevans%fallst at wb3ffv.ampr.org
OTHER: ...!attmail!fallst!tkevans
Tim Evans  2201 Brookhaven Court, Fallston, MD  21047   (301) 965-3286