RE: Twinax? -- MIDRANGE-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Subject: RE: Twinax?
From: rob@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 09:22:14 -0500
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

I agree that the HMC isn't so bad.  When it first came out it was a 
festering piece of excrement.  Now, it's not so bad.  And the two hmc's, 
one at one site and one at the other, and either one can control either i5 
is not just theory.  We do it in practice.

Twinax sucks.  The reliability is poor.  The flexibility is poor.  Remote 
access is nonexistent.

Rob Berendt

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

RE: Twinax? , ChadB
RE: Twinax? , Marc Rauzier
RE: Twinax? , Rhett Hermer

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.