[SPARCbook] re: linux on GX

[Len Rose]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hi Rich!

Excuse me, but I use fast sparc machines all the time, and the 3GX is
dog slow. I still use it a great deal but I'm a realist. I'm not going to debate
anything else you've said with the above exception because I don't want this to
turn into some holy war. I honestly wanted to know what others felt about not
using Solaris on such a slow machine when there are so much faster laptops
around. Maybe I'm a minority but I didn't buy the Tadpoles because they were
cheap. I bought them because I needed a portable solaris/sparc platform. Also,
I don't consider laptop I/O performance a factor, I don't do I/O intensive
applications on laptops anyway because of the almost universally inferior drive
performance on any laptop. Also mentioning the SBUS isn't appropriate here
since there is no SBUS in my Tadpole..oops, I said I wouldn't debate anything
else.. On that note, thanks.


> 
> Firstly, I don't think I'd call the 3GX 'very slow', and certainly not
> the 3XTs and such -- they're not gaming machines, and I doubt people
> are doing quantum mathematics on them, so a 110 or 170MHz sparc is
> more processor than many people need. On mine, the load seldom hits 1,
> unless I'm using netscape :-).
> 
> Second, I'm not sure what sort of faster x86 you'd get for $US 450;
> looking on eBay I'd get a P133 or P166 with similar RAM, disk and
> display. The 166 is probably competitive with the 110MHz sparc (with
> usual cross-architecture caveats), but I don't get sbus, I don't get
> built-in ethernet, I don't get built-in ISDN, I get a cheap plastic
> case and probably a cheap flimsy keyboard. I *certainly* don't get a
> three-button 'mouse'. And I have the same computer as a lot of other
> people.
> 
> Oh, and watch how you measure performance -- your "faster" x86 laptops
> will often have an IO bottleneck. (There's more to it than the
> processor, after all.)
> 
> (I wonder if, back when it was barely a kernel that would boot, people
> said "I wonder why people take this hardly functional Linux kernel
> when they could be running Xenix, SCO or Minix on their x86?" :-)
> 
> Oh, and from the Jargon File:
> 
>    hack value n.
>      
>    Often adduced as the reason or motivation for expending effort toward
>    a seemingly useless goal, the point being that the accomplished goal
>    is a hack. For example, MacLISP had features for reading and printing
>    Roman numerals, which were installed purely for hack value. See
>    _display hack_ (q.v.) for one method of computing hack value, but this
>    cannot really be explained, only experienced. As Louis Armstrong once
>    said when asked to explain jazz: "Man, if you gotta ask you'll never
>    know."
> 
> The last sentence is particularly apropos.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>   -Rich
> 
> -- 
> ------------------------------ Rich Lafferty ---------------------------
>  Sysadmin/Programmer, Information and Instructional Technology Services
>    Concordia University, Montreal, QC                 (514) 848-7625
> ------------------------- rich at alcor.concordia.ca ----------------------


len at netsys.com
http://www.netsys.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.1

iQCVAwUBOCD4YIef0OvUNu5PAQGZtgQAt11C+qq6ZzHHlnkm2Rwh8HOM20tcOb3o
m9nSa/I33Tb+/OvbkhYvHpK0E36uotUxjA+aet/opzS3fFzLscHevR1xcXRKetsm
6QIepFo88Gi1lS+DmRbiHM2+PtmbTtNDNZGGX6KbZV0IKZnh3ub8TdXvlDBFRixm
9Y60+ywJc5c=
=Dhm8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----