Hmmm, as for WebsPhear ( really liked that one:) ) and IBM support they
don't give you support if you're not $1.000.000.000 company. Well, sometimes
they do but only if you get ugly with them on phones and harass them enough.
They don't care about small businesses... At least that is the case in
Sweden. Don't know about the rest of the world, but it's probably similar.

And unconfirmed sources say there is only 1 (one) expert at WebsPhere in
Europe, and he works at a lab in France. The waiting list for him is
something like 8 months.




Johan




----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernst de Haan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Orion-Interest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: Where are the perfumes bubble bath beads


> And I heard that IBM doesn't provide support for WebsPhear if your box
doesn't
> have at *least* 1 GB of internal memory (!) Can anyone confirm that ? And
if
> so, what would they need 1 GB for ? Static caches or so I guess. *BIG*
static
> caches.
>
> (Not that I wouldn't like to have a good reason to upgrade my workstation
from
> the lousy 384 MB it's having now ;-P )
>
> --
> Ernst
>
>
> Kemp Randy-W18971 wrote:
> > Here is a mystery I need help with.  If all JSP engines and EJB servers
are approximately equal, then what explains the size differences in the
following examples?
> > Latest production Orion - 10 MG
> > Latest production Resin - 12.8 MG
> > Latest productions Jboss/Tomcat - 23.3 Mg
> > Latest production Unify Ewave Engine - 18.1 MG
> > Latest production Iplanet 6.1 - Approximately 1 Gig
> > Latest Productions Oracle 9I AS - Approximately 1 Gig
> >   In a past commercial for Motel 6, they talk about not having any
perfumed bubble bath beads, like the higher priced hotels.  So I ask these
questions.  What could possible take up 1 gig, when all JSP engines and EJB
servers are supposed to have similar or identical functionality?  Out of
curiosity, how much space does Weblogic take up? Where are the perfumed
bubble bath beads in the 1 gig space?
> >
> >
> >


Reply via email to