[247] in resnet
Re: AT1700 Cards
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jonathan Albert)
Thu Mar 10 12:21:55 1994
To: resnet@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Mar 1994 05:04:25 EST."
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 1994 12:20:49 -0500
From: Jonathan Albert <jalbert@MIT.EDU>
In message <9403101004.AA17849@alexei.MIT.EDU>, fihsu@MIT.EDU writes:
>>on the cards even before they were out...anyways, whatever, I wonder what
>>MCC thought about in choosing the card anyways...?
>
>Unofficial comment from the perspective of a student who works at the MCC...
>The MCC does not simply pick and choose whatever products it wants to carry.
>And there are alot of great hardware/software products that we don't stock,
>along with ones that we do. Call it beauacracy or whatever, but whether we
>carry a certain product often depends on the recommendations/evaluations of
>a committee or other group in MIT. I think the MCC's contribution to this
>process is in determining whether we can meet the demand for a certain
>product (which means being able to get that product in decent quantity and
>relatively quickly) and whether we can offer that product at a competetive
>price. Other factors, such as evaluating performance, reliability, ease of
>use, vendor support, making sure it works with the other products supported
>at MIT, feasibility of being able to provide support within MIT (ala
>Microcomputer Help Line, etc.) are much in the hands of other groups
>(although there is a certain amount of overlap).
>
>As you may already know, the MCC has carried the 3Com cards. But we
>were not able to offer a card like the 3C509 at a competitive price (I think
>our price is $140.) One of the major goals of picking THE resnet card
>was to be able to offer it for less than $100, for instance.
>
>Regrettably, the best performing/rated/designed product is not always the best
>choice from the standpoint of a reseller.
>
>>Andy
>
>Francis
>RCC for 620 Huntington Ave.
>also working for (but that's it) the MIT Computer Connection, x3-7686
There was a period of about a month when I was waiting for the
recommendation to be revealed. When I was, all it said in TechInfo
was "Allied Telesis". I thought they meant the AT1500. I had read
all the Linux documentation and said they were really good cards, and
I knew it was supported by LAN Manager for DOS. Anyway, it is a GREAT
card. I can't figure out why they went with the AT1700 and not the
AT1500. It is faster than a 3COM509, doesn't have errors like the 509
in linux, and costs about $90 in a COMBO version or $70 in a UTP/AUI
version. Plus, unlike the 509, it autodetects what connector you are
using.
jd
