Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (ASCEND) Opinions on 200+

Out of the 11 I've deployed at various international offices - five
had hardware problems with the Maxes locking up.
One site I had to replace the hardware twice.  Singapore I just
replaced due to Max 200 lockups and the replacement
machine running the same code is running great - 14 days continuous
uptime.  I need to replace Sydney and Tokyo due to
the intermittent lockups.  These lockups/freezes whatever appear to
NOT depend on revision of code running on them.  I've
tried many.  The Max 200 freezes are particularly annoying because
instead of politely rebooting - they just hang and require a manual
reset of the box.  When you are 12,000 miles away from one of these
offices and the most technical person there
is in sales...you get the picture.

Note that the cost of these boxes makes them attractive.  We get them
for just $1800 from our vendor (sans modem or BRI).  We also like that
the code is so identical to our bigger maxen.  Uniformity of platform
is attractive.  And we'd rather go this kind of route than say an NT
box with a modem card.  If you get one of the good Max 200's it'll
likely work well for you.  But be prepared for a 40% chance you'll
need an RMA.

If I were to do it over again I would look at the 3Com. They've got a
model that uses two BRIs and no separate analog modems.  It runs
$4,000 - $5,000.  I'd also look at the Shiva.





From: Dean_Heltemes@cargill.com AT Internet on 12/31/97 03:07 PM EST

To:   ascend-users@bungi.com AT Internet@ccMTA-USCU-NT-MTA
cc:    (bcc: Michael Medwid/Cupertino/Cal/SYMANTEC)
Subject:  (ASCEND) Opinions on 200+



Item Subject: cc:Mail Text
     The archives of this list are filled with references to problems
     with the 200+.  So far I have been very happy with the MAX 400x
     and Pipeline family, but we really require a vendor with a solid
     low-end product.  I am interested in hearing current opinions
     from people with experience with the 200+.

     Thanks,
     Dean Heltemes
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:   <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>


Received: from Mailer.symantec.com (198.6.49.5) by
smtp-ima.symantec.com with
SMTP
  (IMA Internet Exchange 2.11 Enterprise) id 000315A2; Wed, 31 Dec 97
  13:58:45
-0800
Received: from max.bungi.com (max.bungi.com [207.126.97.7]) by
Mailer.symantec.com (8.8.4/8.7.6) with ESMTP id OAA15017 for
<MMedwid@symantec.com>; Wed, 31 Dec 1997 14:01:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
 by max.bungi.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA04206
 for ascend-users-outgoing; Wed, 31 Dec 1997 13:07:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Authentication-Warning: max.bungi.com: majordom set sender to
owner-ascend-users using -f
Received: from daver.bungi.com (daver.bungi.com [207.126.97.2])
 by max.bungi.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04201
 for <ascend-users@max.bungi.com>; Wed, 31 Dec 1997 13:07:51 -0800
 (PST)
From: Dean_Heltemes@cargill.com
Received: from cargill.com(really [167.136.225.225]) by
daver.bungi.com
 via sendmail with esmtp
 id <m0xnVMj-0000fEC@daver.bungi.com>
 for <ascend-users@bungi.com>; Wed, 31 Dec 1997 13:07:49 -0800 (PST)
 (Smail-3.2.0.94 1997-Apr-22 #8 built 1997-Jun-19)
Received: (from root@localhost) by cargill.com (8.8.2/8.8.0) id
PAA04526 for <ascend-users@bungi.com>; Wed, 31 Dec 1997 15:07:48 -0600
(CST) Received: from hdqt.cargill.com(157.239.110.12) by
charon.cargill.com via smap
(V1.3mjr)
 id sma004523; Wed Dec 31 15:07:35 1997
Received: from localhost by hdqt.cargill.com with SMTP
 (1.37.109.20/16.2) id AA221152449; Wed, 31 Dec 1997 15:07:29 -0600
X-Openmail-Hops: 1
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 15:07:20 -0600
Message-Id: <H00007271c1ce462@MHS>
Subject: (ASCEND) Opinions on 200+
To: ascend-users@bungi.com
Sender: owner-ascend-users@max.bungi.com
Precedence: bulk