[rescue] OT: Linux and USB on Intel

[Kurt Huhn]

David Passmore <dpassmor at sneakers.org> wrote:

> 
> However, Linux often defeats itself... when I was evaluating Linux
> for, of all the mundane things, web server log processing... it choked
> on very large logs (winamp.com) due to, among many things, its memory
> architecture (yay bounce buffers!). We went with UltraSPARC-III
> instead. The graphs were interesting... in terms of records per minute
> plotted against records processed, the SPARC architectures leveled
> off... while the Linux peaked quickly, and then took a nosedive.

Not only do I believe it, but I've experienced it.  You'll get no
argument from me on that front.  Trust me, if I had my druthers, I'd be
running a pile of SGI/Irix systems, not Dell systems with Linux.  But,
and this is a big 'but', I can't afford to do it.  I'd like to, but the
income simply isn't there.

Thankfully, we don't do an extreme amount of data movement or parseing -
though if it comes down to it you can bet I'll be suggesting new
hardware.

> 
> Believe it or not, at AOL, Windows is not an option for internal
> systems. Neither was it at @Home. We run Sun, SGI, and HP-UX. However,
> the Linux movement is growing rapidly among middle-management trying
> to meet tighter budgets.
> 

A company I worked for had the Compaq service contract for most of the
SF Bay area - @Home was one of the places we serviced.  I always
wondered why we had to bring hard drives to the front desk and wait for
an engineer to come down to swap out the bad drive.  The technicians
never were allowed to go past the front desk - even though I think the
warranty called for it (they would fudge the reports back to Compaq).

-- 
Kurt                 "Who am I kidding?  Cake is just a delivery
kurt at k-huhn.com        mechanism for icing." 
                                              -- Alton Brown