On 20 Jul 96 01:40am, Doug Joorish wrote to George Fliger:
 GF> On 30 Jun 96 05:39pm, Toby Corkindale wrote to All:
 GF> Good luck finding someone who will want to take them off your hands (but
 GF> you might get lucky).
 GF> George
 DJ> Why do you say that? Star networks are much preferrable to ring
 DJ> for obvious reasons. Coax has better range than twisted pair
 DJ> (although, I use twisted pair, myself). Personally, if
 DJ> something like the above were to come into my hands, I would be
 DJ> quite pleased! (In fact, if your lookin' to get rid of them,
 DJ> mayhap we can arrange someting)
Why?  Simply because, although coax has better range, Arcnet's
2Mbit/sec. transfer rate is 5 times slower than 10Base2, 10Base5 or
10BaseT and 50 times slower than 100BaseTX.  Arcnet can also be set up
to include a ring within the star off a hub (I know, I've done it)
which defeats any one station, one port fault tolerance normally
associated with hubs and concentrators. Arcnet hubs do not provide
the same level of fault tolerance and partitioning support that Ethernet
hubs and concentrators provide.
As for range, my choice would be FDDI.  More expensive than Arcnet to be
sure, but I don't think I'd run into any problems with signal
degradation caused by cable length.  I think I could keep my LAN sites
within the generous 20+ mile range allowed. 
George
... Death to the fascist insects who suck the blood of the people!
--- Via Silver Xpress V4.3P BT003
---------------