From: MERC::"uunet!CRVAX.SRI.COM!RELAY-INFO-VAX" 23-DEC-1992 02:17:32.18 To: info-vax@kl.sri.com CC: Subj: Summary : Pathwork vs Novell I sent out a mini survey on the network feasibility issue with regard to DECnet and MS Windows, a specifically asked in my question of Pathwork in comparison to Novell netware. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The conclusion from the respondents are that Pathwork should perform quite reasonable provided the system is not overloaded. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Below is details you may want to skip Out of the 10 people responded, only 1 advice was negative to Pathwork, the rests are either neutral or in favor of Pathwork. I have summed up all the responds that I got below, and mails that I received is available on request. Below is summary of individual's mail that I received up to date. (1)====================================================================== Nick Ruggiero, GRO Science Support Center, NASA/GSFC Code 668.1 Pathwork provides many features and in his opinion "is an excellent package", both on PC and on MAC. (2)====================================================================== gladstog@rnprin.DNET.roche.com, Gary Gladstone Senior Programmer/Analyst Hoffmann-La Roche 340 Kingsland St (bldg 85/3) Nutley NJ 07110-1199 Gary provides a list comparing Novell/Pathwork Pathwork is strong in administrative support. Initial cost is lower for Novell, but Pathwork needs no additional purchases of servers to upgrade. Pathwork also support larger and faster disks (does not mention if they are more expensive. Ling) Novell performs better for 10 to 15 users, but Pathwork does not degrade much above 15 users while Novell does. Pathwork supports Ethernet/ASYNC connection to VAX. Novell needs less PC memory than Pathwork. Pathwork support central administrative backup, and need no individual user's intervention for individual user's local backup. Pathwork can support PC and MAC users to share files. (3)====================================================================== Alistair Grant Internet: alistair@mits.com.au Alistair indicates that it is not worth the extra investment for current VAX or Ultrix user to go for the Novell, while Pathwork does have adequate support for MS Windows. (4)====================================================================== Umberto Tachinardi, MD Medical Informatics Division / Heart Institute Sao Paulo University Medical School Voice: 55 11 881-7558 FAX: 55 11 282-2354 E-Mail: tachinardi@incor.hc.usp.br Umberto stress that installation requires some work, and should ask (and push) for DEC for technical assistance. In general, he is quite happy with the Pathwork and MS Windows combination. koh@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com (Koh) (5)====================================================================== Cody Koh. (of Honeywell Air Transport Systems Division ) koh@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com (Koh) Koh suggests a purely PC environment (that is, site with no DEC system) can benefit more with Novell. He also agrees that Pathwork is quite stable with MS Windows and in general does not have any problem with the combination (which his company is currently using). He mentions DEC support and price tag are weak points. (6)====================================================================== Mark Montanez, System Manager AHEC, (303)556-2409 MONTANEZM@AHECAS.Colorado.EDU Mark's IS department has both Pathwork and Novell running. Novell is faster with light load (~10 users), but degrade fast with more users. Pathwork does not degrade even under heavy load (15 users or more). Pathwork provides more support (to VMS, email, backup) Pathwork is more memory hungry than Novell. He prefers Pathwork than Novell solution. (7)====================================================================== Bryan Petty Univeristy of Pittsburgh Graduate Telecom Student/Slave bjpst5+@pitt.edu Bryan suggests Pathwork is better for organizations that already has DEC system installed. He also advices that Pathwork run on top of TCP/IP uses less memory than DECnet. However, both DECnet and TCP/IP implementation run well for Pathwork. (8)====================================================================== Michael J. O'Connor | Internet: mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com Ford Motor Company, OPEO | UUCP: ...!{backbone}!fmsrl7!mjo 20000 Rotunda, Bldg. 1-3001 | Phone: +1 (313) 248-1260 Dearborn, MI 48121 | Fax: +1 (313) 323-6277 Michael says Pathwork is an "ill-performing clone" of MicroSoft LAN Manager, and should be avoided. He does not give additional reasonings. (9)====================================================================== Alain Martineau Automatismes, Hydro-Quebec 11e etage, Tour de l'est Complexe Desjardins CP 10000 Montreal, Quebec, Canada H5B 1H7 martineau@macmartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca Alain's company is using a 3100 dedicated to serve as a Pathwork server, and is quite happy with it. He suggests that the reasons that Pathwork does not perform well may be due to the system being overloaded heavily. (10)====================================================================== John W. Cox, Manager Systems and Technology Projects FAX: (408) 742-6428 Lockheed Missiles & Space Company 1111 Lockheed Way B573 4802 Internet: COX@OFFICE.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3504 Pathworks seems to work well with PCs & MACs for file and print services. It cost less for a VAX shop to go for Pathwork. ====================================================================== Compile and summarized by Ling Siu Shian 1992/12/17 Many thanks for all that responded. Wish all of you have a nice and peaceful holiday and prosperous new year ahead.