X-no-Archive:yes
Gavin, I cannot believe that anyone would have misconstrued your little
jab.  I didn't comment on it, because, . . . I didn't think I could top it.
 It thought it was great!

Going back to what I did write about, Bruce graciously pointed out in a
private post, that the prices I quoted for the 7933s were way off.  He
reminded me that at introduction, the 7933 was going for $26,000 (thanks,
Bruce.)  I used the figure I vaguely remember having to justify in a
capital funds appropriation, the last time I bought some 7933s.  This was
in 1985, I think.

I wish I had remembered that is was $26,000 at introduction, it would have
underlined my point even more!  Imagine paying $260,000 for something the
equivalent of which you can buy today for $250-400.  I was also going to
compare weight, I was going to say the 7933 weighed about 400 pounds each,
which would have made a total of two tons of gear compared to something
that my 2 year old can lift, shake and throw, with one hand!

Here are some questions for the old-timers.

1- What was the original purchase price of a 7925?
2- How much did the 7933 really weigh?
3- The 7925 and 7933 were quite similar in size, I also think the weighed
about the same.  How much did the 7925 weigh?
4- I remember that the disc packs were about $1,000 each.  Can anyone
confirm or infirm that?

I am still in awe of the rapid pace of technological advancements.  I still
think it's near miraculous how the computer hardware has grown so powerful,
so small, so reliable and so cheap.  And we ain't seen nuthin' yet.

Kind regards,

Denys. . .

Denys Beauchemin
HICOMP America, Inc.
(800) 323-8863  (281) 288-7438         Fax: (281) 355-6879
denys at hicomp.com                             www.hicomp.com


-----Original Message-----
From:   Gavin Scott [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   Thursday, 08 October, 1998 7:04 PM
To:     [log in to unmask]
Subject:        Re: Disc head wires (was Bug in pp5)

When I responded to Jeff earlier...
> > [...]but if there is a bad apple in there, we can certainly forgive
that,
> > provided you point out the bad apple :-)
>
> That's what we have Denys for.

I was referring to Denys' tendency to point out "bad apples" (i.e. his
somewhat endless NT is better than Apple's Macintosh series of postings),
and did not mean to imply that Denys himself is in any way a "bad apple".

If anyone got that impression, I apologize.

G.