Quote from: Thing on July 05, 2004, 04:00 PM
QuoteShould have mentioned I am running Windows XP for the next 2 weeks.
Oh and in reply to your next post, "You're Welcome".
he's Nick Burns, Your Companys's Computer Guy.
ps: why on earth would anyone want to run sun solaris?
I myself, if I have to go with any linux distro, am a SuSE man.
...because solaris is rock solid and kicks the crap out of any linux distro?
Quote from: $t0rm on July 06, 2004, 08:48 PM
...because solaris is rock solid and kicks the crap out of any linux distro?
In what ways? (I am not trying to argue, I just want to know)
I would say definatly for SPARC... Linux is not as developed for that I guess, but not too many people are using sparc, these days its x86 or those ibm power chips (and x86 is taking over the world).
Running solaris on x86 is painful from what I have heard and read; I have heard that x86 solaris has poor hardware support and linux outperforms it.
Well, if you're going to do web hosting Linux is fine for it. But if you're going to run telecommunications or a nuclear power plant or something, you need a tried-and-tested OS, PLUS a company that will support it and say that it won't fail.
Try running Linux on one of these babies:
http://www.sun.com/servers/highend/sunfire_e25k/index.xml
oh running a nuclear power plant, never had to do that so I wouldnt know ;)
http://www.sun.com/servers/highend/sunfire_e25k/index.xml yah those a SPARC systems, they are basically designed to run solaris. Just like those IBM servers are geared to run AIX (though linux can go there too).
Last week I could not speel Solaris. Now I is one.
This morning I agreed to admin a couple of Sparc boxes. Good thing the
owner thinks I know what I'm doing. :P
Yes Arta, those two. I'm still waiting for root on the dev machine so
I can test compile PHP and Apache before I fuck fix up the production
box. The previous admin compiled Apache without DSO support. Weirdo.
Sun is in some real trouble though getting behind SPARC... not to many people are using it. Like I said x86 is taking over the world. If 64bit really cathes on the ibm power chips might meet their demise too.
Sun and IBM servers are used for airplanes and stuff...I don't think x86 will be running those any time soon.
QuoteSPARC... not to many people are using it.
If you've ever used a cell phone, you've used it and no, it isn't the phone.
./edit http://www.theregister.com/2004/07/07/sun_q4_up/
Quote from: Thing on July 07, 2004, 11:13 PM
QuoteSPARC... not to many people are using it.
If you've ever used a cell phone, you've used it and no, it isn't the phone.
./edit http://www.theregister.com/2004/07/07/sun_q4_up/
Telecomunications, power, stuff like that are the few areas where you will see sparc, but look just about everywhere, most of the stuff is on x86 and it is becomeing standard. IBM power chips are still arround, but like I said if 64bit catches on, they could meat their match. At the end of the day x86 out performs sparc because the x86 architecture has many cisc features to it, it acts more like cisc, though it is infact still risc. The reason why you see telecomunications places and air ports using sparc is because solaris is very good for for that because of whatchamacallit... can't remember the term, brain fart... I was talking to a guy who works at altel here in town and plays with sparc boxes sometimes and I forgot the term he used, but he basically said that solaris is the most suited os for telecom. But when I originally asked why would anyone use solaris I meant why would anyone run solaris on an x86 system. You do not see the air ports and telecom places running it on x86 (atleast I have never seen that, if they are going to run solaris they are going to run it with hardware that it with the proper hardware that it will get along with, and solaris sort of has that reputation for not likeing a lot of hardware and running slower because of it when it is not aggreeing with the hardware, or so I have heard).
Ps: i would expect motorola to use powerpc because didn't they help ibm make that?
But back to the original question, meh why do you want to run solaris? You are on x86 correct? Why run a web server from solaris? I can see windows, linux, bsd, aix, even a mac... to a much lesser extent, but why solaris?
Quote from: Thing on July 07, 2004, 11:13 PM
If you've ever used a cell phone, you've used it and no, it isn't the phone.
./edit http://www.theregister.com/2004/07/07/sun_q4_up/
Hmm, don't see connection between that and cell phone?
It's a secret connection, Adron.
Quote from: Thing on July 08, 2004, 04:03 PM
It's a secret connection, Adron.
well a lot of telecomunications companies do use sparc, except motoroloa which uses powerpc I believe because they codeveloped it with ibm. Its for their boxes back at the mothership or where ever they keep the servers....
Quote from: peofeoknight on July 08, 2004, 08:58 PM
Quote from: Thing on July 08, 2004, 04:03 PM
It's a secret connection, Adron.
well a lot of telecomunications companies do use sparc, except motoroloa which uses powerpc I believe because they codeveloped it with ibm.
Hmm, I thought Ericsson used their own hardware platform and their own language..
I can only comment on the networks that I've been told about from a Nortell employee. Nortell supplies hardware/software for cell sites that is proprietary. All of the configuration and monitoring is done with SPARC stations.
Quote from: Adron on July 09, 2004, 03:37 AM
Quote from: peofeoknight on July 08, 2004, 08:58 PM
Quote from: Thing on July 08, 2004, 04:03 PM
It's a secret connection, Adron.
well a lot of telecomunications companies do use sparc, except motoroloa which uses powerpc I believe because they codeveloped it with ibm.
Hmm, I thought Ericsson used their own hardware platform and their own language..
they might, but I know that severel telecom places are on sparc... I know Altel is. I bet Sprint is on 486 or something weak and old like that... thats why I cant get a God damn signal inside of my house, school, or place of work. I can't use my phone practically anywhere because the sprint network sucks so bad, I do not live in the boonies either, I live in jacksonville florida! The super bowl will be here this year for God's sake.
Sprint's been having a lot of problems. My mom was programming for them but last year they cut 5000 people.
Sprint is american. I've been using Telia, always and exclusively, for my cellphones.
Sprint PCS sucks cock. My contract is up in about a week and I'm switching to Verizon. They have spent a ton of money on their network and my buddy at Nortell tells me that they are installing bleeding edge tech.
Quote from: Thing on July 09, 2004, 07:37 PM
Sprint PCS sucks cock. My contract is up in about a week and I'm switching to Verizon. They have spent a ton of money on their network and my buddy at Nortell tells me that they are installing bleeding edge tech.
I would like to move to verizon or moterola or something, I am sick and tired of not getting a damned signal in my house! Well I get one, but I will be on the phone and then loose the signal, the strength is never more then 1 bar. Their vision service is good, like how aim is built into the web browser, but then you have to pay for internet and text messageing, so screw them, I do not need aim on my cell.
Quote from: Thing on July 09, 2004, 07:37 PM
Sprint PCS sucks cock. My contract is up in about a week and I'm switching to Verizon. They have spent a ton of money on their network and my buddy at Nortell tells me that they are installing bleeding edge tech.
Ew, bleeding edge.
Update on the 2 SPARCs:
I've been working on them pretty hard the past couple of days and they are performing quite well in spite of the previous admin. Compiling large programs is very fast and the webserver handles loads with ease. After a complaint from the owner about poor performance on the mail server, I investigated and found that a variety of machines in Korea and Russia have been ass-raping it since before the first log rotation. (A long time).
Important safety tip:
Don't let your box be an open relay!
Linux is the new hotness but Sun still kicks much ass. I just might have to find a SPARC box for myself.
yes because its not like you can build one yourself ::). I am still a big proponent of x86....
Quote from: Thing on July 11, 2004, 08:45 PM
Update on the 2 SPARCs:
I've been working on them pretty hard the past couple of days and they are performing quite well in spite of the previous admin. Compiling large programs is very fast and the webserver handles loads with ease. After a complaint from the owner about poor performance on the mail server, I investigated and found that a variety of machines in Korea and Russia have been ass-raping it since before the first log rotation. (A long time).
Important safety tip:
Don't let your box be an open relay!
Linux is the new hotness but Sun still kicks much ass. I just might have to find a SPARC box for myself.
Check out SGI boxes for pure speed. It is my understanding that for high-speed Linux, nobody beats SGI workstations. (http://www.sgi.com/workstations/)
Quote from: Grok on July 11, 2004, 10:53 PM
Check out SGI boxes for pure speed. It is my understanding that for high-speed Linux, nobody beats SGI workstations. (http://www.sgi.com/workstations/)
Those processors are nothing too insane though. Itanium and xeon are better. Some amd procs and boast similar performance too. I mean you can have a bord with a couple xeons or itanium2 with several meg l2 cache and a higher clock speed....
I like my Beowulf cluster of XBoxes just fine thank you :)
Have a picture?
Quote from: peofeoknight on July 11, 2004, 11:47 PM
Quote from: Grok on July 11, 2004, 10:53 PM
Check out SGI boxes for pure speed. It is my understanding that for high-speed Linux, nobody beats SGI workstations. (http://www.sgi.com/workstations/)
Those processors are nothing too insane though. Itanium and xeon are better. Some amd procs and boast similar performance too. I mean you can have a bord with a couple xeons or itanium2 with several meg l2 cache and a higher clock speed....
SGI boxes are built with the same equipment available to other manufacturers, but engineered for maximum speed on horizontal applications. I'm not a hardware engineer so cannot tell you the details, but you can read their site for engineering specs.
Yes but they are using "MIPS" processors. I am guessing it is x86 and cisc because windows will run on it. I am wondering why you would go with a MIPS processor as apposed to an amd or intel, which are better it seems.... I have never heard of mips before, I googled it, but the site for the manufacturer is not getting too specific. Oh now toshiba is getting into the processor game, it seems that AMD and INTEL have a few more challengers that are making 64bit procs, wonder if they will ever be a threat.
Just because you've never heard of it doesn't mean thast Intel or AMD are obviuosly better.
Why not? I mean I know that AMD and INTEL spend insane amounts of cash on R&D, and are big companies and can do that, but some little new company would not be able to. But from the specs on these mips procs, compared to an intel xeon or itanium, it is clear which is superior.
Which is better, an intel chipset or a SiS chipset? Intel obviously because they are spending more cash on R&D and have a more refined product, though it is generally more expensive.
The workstation they have can have up to four processors. And 512MB-16GB synchronous Double-Data rate ram (DDR). I don't konw it doesn't look like a bad little company to me.
Quote from: peofeoknight on July 13, 2004, 01:54 AMYes but they are using "MIPS" processors.
Horrors, not MIPS processors!
Think of how fast our OS's could be if we wrote them with SILICON.
Quote from: muert0 on July 13, 2004, 02:24 PM
The workstation they have can have up to four processors. And 512MB-16GB synchronous Double-Data rate ram (DDR). I don't konw it doesn't look like a bad little company to me.
and you cant do that with intel and amd though? I mean I have seen quad xeon and quad opteron.... everyone knows what ddr is, you don't need to spell out the acronym to us :p
Quote from: peofeoknight on July 13, 2004, 01:54 AM
Yes but they are using "MIPS" processors. I am guessing it is x86 and cisc because windows will run on it.
No, MIPS processors can use many more registers than x86. "x86" and "MIPS" are different processor standards. Like alpha, powerpc, 68k or others.
oh really? I just assumed mips was another x86 architecture, like amd and intel are both very different but still x86. Mips is cisc though, it would have to be.
Processor Support 1 MIPS® RISC 64-bit R16000A™ 800 MHz or 700MHz CPU; 4MB L2 cache (http://www.sgi.com/workstations/fuel/tech_specs.html)
well that cache and clock speed is nothing too outstanding, but what is the bus and bandwidth... I can't really say if its good or not because I know nothing about that architecture.
Quote from: peofeoknight on July 15, 2004, 08:58 PM
well that cache and clock speed is nothing too outstanding, but what is the bus and bandwidth... I can't really say if its good or not because I know nothing about that architecture.
Then why are you? SGI makes the fastest, best-of-breed workstations for engineers requiring the best speed available. They have done this for 15-20 years, probably almost as long as you've been alive. You see a number like 800 Mhz CPU, and think eww yuk, slow computer. In the previous message you said it must be CISC, so I helped show you that it was, indeed, RISC. OK yes, I am annoyed by you trying to come off as an authority on a lot of things you know very little about.
Quote from: Grok on July 15, 2004, 09:30 PM
Quote from: peofeoknight on July 15, 2004, 08:58 PM
well that cache and clock speed is nothing too outstanding, but what is the bus and bandwidth... I can't really say if its good or not because I know nothing about that architecture.
Then why are you? SGI makes the fastest, best-of-breed workstations for engineers requiring the best speed available. They have done this for 15-20 years, probably almost as long as you've been alive. You see a number like 800 Mhz CPU, and think eww yuk, slow computer. In the previous message you said it must be CISC, so I helped show you that it was, indeed, RISC. OK yes, I am annoyed by you trying to come off as an authority on a lot of things you know very little about.
Bah. I was assumeing it was a cisc x86 architecture like amd and intel, thats why. I did not know it was its own architecture, or risc for that matter. The reason I assumed that is I thought I read it could run windows, I have not know windows to run on anything besides x86. Looking back at the original link the work stations come bundled with irix which is unix, I may have been looking at the server page when I got into thinking they could run windows (but I doubt it, but somehow I still got windows into my head), they have mips server with irix and intel itanium2 servers, which itanium2 would be able to run windows or linux.
Quote from: peofeoknight on July 15, 2004, 09:36 PM
I have not know windows to run on anything besides x86. Looking back at the original link the work stations come bundled with irix which is unix, I may have been looking at the server page when I got into thinking they could run windows (but I doubt it, but somehow I still got windows into my head), they have mips server with irix and intel itanium2 servers, which itanium2 would be able to run windows or linux.
Windows NT ran on Intel (x86), Motorola (Alpha), and IBM (PowerPC) processors.
P.S. Please have some of my spare punctuation, as there is enough for sentence. ( .......... )
Valhalla Legends Forum
Programming
Web Development <--- spelling and grammar forum?
Quote from: peofeoknight on July 16, 2004, 12:24 PM
Valhalla Legends Forum
Programming
Web Development <--- spelling and grammar forum?
Actually, *forum administrator*, but aside from that, my reply had on-topic information, and a P.S. that was subtle enough to make you want to pay more attention to your writing. I didn't go off on you, call you illiterate, make corrections for you, flame you, just loaned you some periods.
Returning to topic ... Microsoft made Windows NT for those other platforms, and even had VB working on the Alpha platforms. I almost bought a Compaq Alpha in 1997 when they were practically giving them away. Should have, but oh well. Then when Windows 2000 came out, they dropped support for PowerPC and stayed with just Alpha as an alternative platform. From reports I heard, the Alpha was a more reliable Windows server than the PC was, for whatever reason. Maybe because the RISC kernel was easier to write? Skywing might have some input on that.
It would be interesting if the power pc support were still there. Hypathetically, if windows xp could run on power pc, would that mean one could put windows xp on a mac since they are on the IBM chips?
Quote from: peofeoknight on July 16, 2004, 12:36 PM
It would be interesting if the power pc support were still there. Hypathetically, if windows xp could run on power pc, would that mean one could put windows xp on a mac since they are on the IBM chips?
Well, to understand Power PC support, you have to understand history. Back in those days (1995-2000), (much less 2000 than 1995), IBM OS/2 WARP was a significant threat to Windows operating system. It was your only great GUI-based application server that was fully 32-bit. Much of the corporate world ran enterprise class application servers on OS2 Warp.
That in mind, Microsoft wanted NT to be seen as a platform-independent choice. Write your programs for Win32, use them on any hardware you want! OS/2's demise, and the rise of Java, changed the way people and companies think about platform independence. So OS platform mobility was no longer a big deal. If you wanted application portability, you wrote in Java. And still do.
P.S. I think there was also talk of writing it for Motorola CPU, but do not know if that was ever finished. That would cover your Macs of those days. 68000-class motorola cpus.
I thought powerpc was developed by ibm and motorola, a joint venture.
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/P/PowerPC.html