14 Dec
2003
14 Dec
'03
1:07 p.m.
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Eric Smith wrote:
That wouldn't have anything to do with it performing /too/ well,
would it?
-brian.
Antonio wrote:
I don't
know what the performance figures were for the
11/74 either. However, the beast was deemed to be too
hard to maintain. Too many cables, too much downtime.
That was one of the rumors, but I've never believed it. There's no
fundamental reason why it should have been any harder to maintain than
any other large computer. I think this was just a feeble attempt by
DEC management to come up with an excuse to give customers, when they
didn't want to admit the real reason the product was cancelled.