A/UX performance

[Robert K. Shull]

In article <171 at tekbspa.UUCP> joe at tekbspa.UUCP (Joe Angelo) writes:
>in article <1837 at ssc-vax.UUCP>, benoni at ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel) says:
>> 
>> As can be seen the low-end 3/50 outperforms with relative ease the
>
>a six page ``feature'' list. This entire A/UX thing has really
>This is MY personal opp. -> I'm not impressed Apple.  But who cares?
> happens!"              uunet!tekbspa!joe -OR- tekbspa!joe at uunet.uu.net

This isn't a flame at anyone in particular, just something I thought needed
to be said:
	Give it some time!

You're using the first release of a completely new OS. Did anyone use
SunOS 1.2? The "feature" list could have been more like 60 or 70 pages.
It's taken a BUNCH of releases to make the fixes, fix the fixes, fix those
fixes, etc.
What made you expect that A/UX would be perfect? Have you ever used a major
piece of software that was perfect in its first release?
I'm not saying we should blindly accept everything, but the tone of most
of these message seems VERY accusing.
By the way, I'd love to see the source for those benchmarks that were
posted recently. I can't come close to the Dhrystone numbers on our
Sun 3's.

-- 
Robert K. Shull
University of Oklahoma, Engineering Computer Network
ihnp4!occrsh!uokmax!rob		CIS 73765,1254		Delphi	RKSHULL
Opinions contained herein in no way reflect those of the University of Oklahoma.