[geeks] Opinions on the HP C3x00?

[Jochen Kunz]

On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 08:10:04 -0600 (CST)
"Jonathan C. Patschke" <jp at celestrion.net> wrote:

> but, even with the mouse speed-hack,
Mouse speed-hack?

> every serial-console Sun I've ever used felt like it was miles away
> over the network.  Input is laggy; graphics are laggy.
You mean the machines with the old, proprietary serial keryboards and
rodents? "Serial console" is usually somthing different...
Yes, the old Suns are not that well with X11. I can feel it even with
NetBSD.

> The Blade 1500 was the first Sun I'd used
> that came even close to approaching the level of snappiness that my
> 195MHz Octane had nearly a decade ago--
Well. Sun was never big in the GFX department. So I am not surprised
that a SGI does better in that area.

> so long as one runs CDE or a tiny window manager; Sun's GNOME-based
> thing does an excellent job of bogging down a new 1500.
If I go Solaris I'll use fvwm2. There is only one window manager beside
fvwm2 that I got used to: SGIs 4Dwm. All the other stuff I have seen
didn't fit me. "Desktop environement" bloatware like KDE and GNOME are
out of question.

> Well, the new ones are very expensive.
Who byes a new MIPS based workstation from SGI?

BTW: How well do the Itanc based workstations from SGI sell?
It looks like SGI is the only vendor that sells Itanic based "servers"
and super computers well.

> A new IBM POWER-based workstation
> is almost affordable (5000 USD or so).  A new SGI MIPS-based
> workstation isn't nearly so pocketbook-friendly.
Depends. When I look at e.g. the IBM 43P-150 I see a PeeCee with PPC604e
CPU. A Fuel or even an Octane is a much more sophisticated piece of
technology.
--


tsch|_,
       Jochen

Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/