[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Is this list alive?
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 04:53:52AM -0500, Mouse wrote:
> If you just want computrons, then yeah, you want amd64...or possibly
> ARM or some such if low power is an important consideration. And
> there's probably no point in your being on this list.
I received some first- and second-generation opteron sunfire systems
from a friend who was retiring them. computronically, they are great,
and the 4-way x2200m2 system builds the amd64 NetBSD-6 world in less
than an hour-and-a-quarter, but the service processor + BIOS combination
is a frankenstein horror. undering the new layer of paint and server
facade, it's still a PC.
sunfires sure as hell aren't alphas. maybe the HP superdome stuff is at
the same level as DEC was, but I have my doubts. it seems to me like
the current generation of "high-end" x86 systems were architected by
people who came up through the x86 ranks and never dealt with even
workstation grade SPARC, MIPS, VAX, or Alpha.
I am watching ARM's growth into server space with interest. I
previously had a colocated 30W atom system, and the price/performance
ratio was very good, but it was all consumer-grade commodity parts. the
power supply failed on me after roughly a year, and the motherboard
doesn't support ECC. I'm interested in what ARM can bring to the table.
FWIW, my sparc 2s were around 40W...
> I'm here because I like the Alpha. I have Alphas, which I sometimes
> run (and would like to run more), rather than amd64s. I have/run them
> because I want to. I enjoy it in a way I don't enjoy running on
> peecee hardware. Much the same is true of my SPARCs. Dreamcast.
> Shark. Etc.
the more I learn about and deal with Intel/AMD hardware, the sadder I am
about Alpha's demise. I see some of the ideas percolating through
Intel, but dealing with the "top-of-the-line" and still seeing missing
functionality that was implemented in decades-old hardware is a
disappointment. (it also means there potential opportunity...)
> > the same concerns as storage apply: capacity, performance,
> > availability, physical space, and power consumption / waste heat.
> Yeah. If those are more important to you than whatever considerations
> got you running alphas, then I'd suggest offering the alphas here, or
> on classiccmp or some such, and running amd64s instead. You'll
> probably be happier - and whoever ends up with the alphas almost
> certainly will be.
I did make a call out when I got rid of the last load-o-DEC. there were
no takers for the systems; just some people interested in parts. (that
reminds me I need to box some things up...)
> But if you have other considerations, reasons you want to run alphas
> instead of peecees, then they are your answer to the above, and they
> can guide you in deciding whether it's better, for you, to look for a
> way to use "modern" drives on your alphas or to stockpile "36G" or
> "72G" drives or the like, or what.
while I haven't had any abjectly horrible experiences with large SATA
drives yet, I have secured a stockpile of SCA drives and a new disk
array, so I can at least keep existing in-use systems going for a while
Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." |
Main Index |
Thread Index |