Yes it was. I had several of them, and I had fun with them. Until I learned of the 21066's performance issues and UDB design's thermal problems, I had high hopes of replacing half of our datacenter (thousands of machines) with these little boxen. Fortunately I was able to take one or two home after we decided not to do that. :) I never ran VMS on them, but I did run Digital Unix, which worked well. I later tried Linux, but in those days, on Alphas, half of the processor cycles were spent in the alignment fixup trap handler, so even waiting for keystroke echo was painful...not a good sign for a processor clocked at 166MHz or 233MHz! I went back to Digital Unix in a hurry! -Dave On 06/16/2012 03:46 PM, Kari Uusim ki wrote: I agree absolutely. It was a good beginning though. Kari On 16.6.2012 21:33, Dave McGuire wrote: On 06/16/2012 02:31 PM, Kari Uusim ki wrote: Unfortunately the Multia was way too early for the customers. Nobody seemed to understand the the point with a minimal design. A few years later it would have been a real success. Well...a few years later, with better cooling, and with something other than the 21066 as its CPU. That chip had a memory controller designed by the "NEW GUY!" and it was slower than pissing tar. The 21064's memory bandiwdth is far superior. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA