24 messages in com.perforce.perforce-userComments on Perforce
FromSent OnAttachments
Daigle22 Sep 1997 14:30 
Brad...@email.mot.comBrad_Appleton-GBDA00122 Sep 1997 14:44 
rk...@crow.bmc.comrk22 Sep 1997 14:55 
Jeff...@uplanet.com22 Sep 1997 14:59 
Davi...@world.std.com22 Sep 1997 16:47 
Jeff...@uplanet.com22 Sep 1997 17:00 
Rich...@netapp.com22 Sep 1997 17:09 
kais...@meadow.com22 Sep 1997 17:34 
Alex...@maplesoft.com22 Sep 1997 17:39 
Dian...@whistle.com22 Sep 1997 18:02 
Nave...@vinayak.engr.sgi.com22 Sep 1997 18:34 
WesP...@xmission.com22 Sep 1997 20:47 
Dian...@whistle.com22 Sep 1997 21:38 
Char...@abs-consulting.com22 Sep 1997 21:58 
RobC...@within.com22 Sep 1997 21:58 
Brad...@email.mot.comBrad_Appleton-GBDA00122 Sep 1997 22:15 
Dian...@whistle.com22 Sep 1997 23:43 
# Cowham23 Sep 1997 01:33 
Tony...@informix.com23 Sep 1997 02:44 
Davi...@world.std.com23 Sep 1997 05:27 
Brad...@email.mot.comBrad_Appleton-GBDA00123 Sep 1997 05:57 
Geor...@mc.com23 Sep 1997 07:37 
Mark...@glyphic.com23 Sep 1997 10:19 
Char...@abs-consulting.com23 Sep 1997 14:13 
Subject:Comments on Perforce
From:Rich...@netapp.com (Rich@netapp.com)
Date:09/22/1997 05:09:15 PM
List:com.perforce.perforce-user

But with all due regard, selling an SCM system on performance seems to me a bit like selling a parachute as being easy to pack; it's a nice feature but not to be confused with the central reason you're buying the product.

Well, I'm not a skydiver, but if I were, I would sure prefer using a parachute that is easy to pack, not only because it can be packed more quickly (more jumps, more fun) , but (mainly) because the chances of having it be packed *correctly* are better.

The trade offs that make perforce *faster* may also have a lot to do with making it just plain work *more of the time*...