Is the 3b2 dead?

[Terry Hull]

sullivan at aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) writes:

>:From article <3532 at wb3ffv.ampr.org>, by smarc at wb3ffv.ampr.org (Marc Siegel):
>> 
>> I wonder how many other people out there work for companies that
>> have LARGE investments in 3b2 hardware and software. We have several
>> 3b2's that may not be supported very much longer. While nobody at
>> AT&T will actually confirm this, it seems that the 3b2 is a dead
>> product line.

>Do you mean the whole 3B2 line or the 310/400 models?  I doubt the former
>and I believe the latter has already been announced.  The low-end 3B2's
>are slower than 386's so why not phase them out.  However, I have heard
>nothing to suggest that the rest of the entire 3B2 line is on its way out.

It takes a fair sized 3b2/1000 to be faster than a good '386 box.  
For the money you spend on the 3B, you can buy several '386s.  In defense
of the 3Bs though, they are very reliable.   

--

Terry Hull 
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Kansas State University
Work:  terry at eece.ksu.edu, rutgers!ksuvax1!eecea!terry
Play:  terry at tah386.manhattan.ks.us, rutgers!ksuvax1!eecea!tah386!terry