I can tolerate a lengthy install, I guess. Goodness knows, I sat through a
couple or three installs of OS/2, and that was in '93 or so, when it took all
day.
Maybe I should have snagged that Quadra 650. . .
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Arnott" <jrasite(a)eoni.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 7:07 PM
Subject: Re: APPLEVISION Monitor
FWIW, most Macs since the Centris/Quadra 650 (1994?)
have had on-board
ethernet. Unlike the competing product, it's pretty much plug and PLAY.
As the early iMac commercial said:
Three steps to get on the internet.
Step 1. Plug it in. (scene shows power cord being plugged in)
Step 2. Get connected. (scene shows RJ-11 plug being plugged in)
Step 3. There is no step three!!! There *is* no step three.
It's really about that easy.
With my systems, I run the wire to the hub, select "connect via
ethernet" in Remote Access and configure the TCP/IP control panel to
either use DHCP or manually enter the necessary IP numbers. Takes all of
three minutes. Much less time than it takes a winbox to find and load
the NIC card drivers with its so-called Wizard.
With Novell, just load and configure the Netware Client for Mac. It's a
much longer process, but what can one expect from Novell...
Jim
Richard Erlacher wrote:
>
> We'd best just agree to disagree about Apple Computer Co product quality.
>
> My position is based on what I saw in '81-'82 with then ][ and ][+, where
10
> complete data losses per hour were the rule
rather than the exception. I
> remember watching a client's hired hand reboot and retype six times in the
> course of a single phone call (on the customer's dime, so that wasn't good
> either) culminating in the loss of the customer, not to mention the loss
of
> the order. It may not be that bad any longer,
but I'm operating on the
> "once-bitten-twice-shy" principle. At that time, my partner and I were in
the
> retail business, and wherever we saw an Apple, we
made a sale, no
exceptions.
>
> My experience with the MACs was limited to what was then "leading edge"
> implementations, which often led to trouble. I imagine the problems were
> resolved, but I didn't get to see that. Consequently, the bad taste
lingers.
>
> I am quite impressed with the seamlessness of the integration of the MAC
> stuff, but since it's all from Apple, you'd expect nothing less.
>
> One thing that I've wondered is how one gets an old MAC to talk on the
> Ethernet when it's a mixed environment with Netware and Windows NT
servers. I
> know Netware has a provision for MAC namespace,
but I've only seen one
> ethernet-capable MAC, which leaves me wondering how folks who use MACs
install
an ethernet
interface.
What do you know about that?
Dick