[rescue] OT: Linux and USB on Intel

[Robert Novak]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 03:31:03PM -0400, Dave McGuire wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 23, 2003, at 03:20 PM, Robert Novak wrote:
> >>  Yeah that always cracks me up.  Some idiots seem to actually believe
> >>machines get slower with age!
> >
> >Everything is relative, as the Mormons say. But you know that. How 
> >would
> >Solaris 9 run on a 4/110 (if it supported that far back)? Identical to 
> >a
> >4500?
> >
> >:)
> 
>   You have a point there, but Solaris9 isn't a particularly good OS 
> choice for a 4/110...and only part of that has to do with it being a 
> "slow" or "fast" OS (ignoring for the moment that, as far as I'm aware, 
> Solaris9 doesn't run on sun4-architecture machines like the 4/110).

Hence "(if it supported that far back)" ... I can't think of any Solaris
2 releases supported on the pre-sparcstation generation, but I haven't
bothered to look in 4 years or so.

>   An OS that is tuned and optimized to run on those machines, however, 
> can perform an amazing amount of work on them.  No, not what a 4500 can 
> do, but a HELL of a lot more than Solaris9 on a 4/110 (again if it were 
> possible).
> 
>   Samba, Postfix, Apache httpd, for example, will all run Just Fine on 
> a 4/110 running, say, SunOS4 or NetBSD/sparc.
> 
>   I'm in a rush...I'm sure you understand my point.

Yeah, and I'd like to think you understand mine. 

On some platforms, newer machines are more efficient in terms of
space/power/heat. We've had this discussion before. And on some 
platforms some users/admins need to run binary-distributed software.
So there are reasons older stuff may no longer be useful in certain
situations, even if it still runs and can be used for other situations.
Oracle 9i with Applications 11i for example. I know you could write
an ERP/CRM system with modern features and functionality to run
under 4.1.3 or NetBSD, but would you want to run it on a 4/110?

And as far as PCs as servers... something doesn't have to be the
best thing on the market ever to be useful and usable. I expect
the dual P3-500 on my coffee table would run rings around the Netra
T1 in the computer room. Both are still useful. The Intel warning label 
on the P3 doesn't make it unable to serve web pages or databases,
or to do fileservice and DNS/NIS, any more than a 4/ part number on
a SPARC workstation/server. 

Speaking of which, <obRescue>anyone want a dual r4400 NEC RISC server?
I dare anyone to run anything but NT on it. :)</obRescue> Oh, and no,
I will not ship it. Having enough fun shipping a 5U rackmount, much 
less a deskside stand on wheels.

--Rob


-- 
Robert Novak, Indyramp Consulting * rnovak at indyramp.com * indyramp.com/~rnovak
	"I don't want to doubt you, Know everything about you
      I don't want to sit Across the table from you Wishing I could run."