3b2/300 or 3b1 ----> I PREFER 3B1 BY A LONG SHOT!!

[Robert C. White Jr.]

in article <471 at cogent.UUCP>, mark at cogent.UUCP (Captain Neptune) says:
> 
> In article <279 at jackson.UUCP> egranthm at jackson.UUCP (Ewan Grantham) writes:
>>Have recently been looking at trying to acquire a 3b1 system when a
>>local vendor contacted me with a 'deal' on a 3b2/300. The 3b2/300
>>comes with 1 meg ram, 30 meg HD, and Unix V.3
>>
>>Since the price of the system is $2350, I'm wondering if this is a better
>>deal than the 3b1. Is the 3b2/300 better supported by AT&T? Will I be able
>>to do more with it?
> 
> We had a 3B2/300 in our office for quite a while.  We eventually returned
> the piece of junk because it was excruciatingly slow - as long as 30 minutes
> to comile a fairly large program!

The 3B2/300 dosn't have a full-logic-on-a-chip CPU present in all
the other 3B2s, and is quite a dog.  It is not "unsupported," but
the only real "support" you are going to get is an offer to let
you buy an upgrade kit to make it a 3B2/310.

There is a world of difference between the 300 and the 310.  It seems
that the CPU logic on the 300 was a duaghter board with a clocking
kludge, which made it mucho-stupido and slug-like.  The banishment
of the daughter board was a good thing, though I dont remember the
price.

Rob.

Disclaimer:  this is not "offical" AT&T party line, but it's close.