A Look at IRIX 6.5.17
XFS writes "OSNews got their hands on the latest version of IRIX, 6.5.17 (released in August), and they have published an interesting article about it and they explain why IRIX was and still is, one of the best workstation Unices out there. Especially when it comes to multimedia/GL performance. I hope SGI will do something with IRIX though, as they seem to have let it fall behind and be one of these great technologies that get lost through various corporate focus shifts..."
Free Mac Mini
What exactly do you want SGI to do with IRIX? Put it in a box, shrinkwrap it, and make it run your overclocked AMD chip-of-the-week? Probably won't happen.
Since IRIX 6.5, SGI has continued its promise to release quarterly updates. Each release introduces changes to the feature and maintenance stream.
I guess I'm confused as to what your hopes for IRIX are.
I haven't read the OSNEWS.com article yet, but I hope it isn't one of those "OS review" articles where they look at the installer and give it a rating.
-David
IRIX Machines are huge in scientific computing.
However, since SGI announced that they wouldn't support IRIX anymore, everyone has concluded that they need to shift over to Linux machines.
Most people I know buy Dell machines. The cost savings is actually less of a concern for scientists (although it is an issue,) than keeping up with the state of the art.
If SGI released their IRIX source code, that would do a lot to help them recover their scientific market share; scientists would pay the extra money for SGI hardware if they aren't worried that support for the OS is going to evaporate entirely, and a Linux distro with lots of SGI-specific code imported from IRIX ought to fit that bill nicely. I'm a biologist, though, so maybe I'm missing something.
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
Recipe for technology article:
1 paragraph fluff
1 paragraph spin
1/2 cup FUD
Mix in HTML editor.
Publish.
Seriously, this article is light on details, and filled with inane comments like "the OS looks dated". While there were some good comments, half of the time it was gushing over the X server, or cheering over the fact that the author can run XMMS. What about performance? Applications? Hardware compatibility/expandibility? Talk to us about the box - does SGI/IRIX know about USB, for instance? FireWire?
Details please..
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
They just hired Jon "maddog" Hall to 'help SGI to sponsor and encourage a community-based "Extreme Linux" movement around SGI's NUMAFlex architecture.'
Got brain?
This is a fine example that X11 is a good graphics-server.
Although alot of X11 bashing has been going on IRIX shows us that X11 is actually a very viable and capable graphics-server and certainly gives the finger to all those X11 implementations which have been done BAD.
So please, next time you go and blame your sucky graphics on X11, take a good look at the implementation of it in your system.
Simple fact: Irix is elegant. The 4DWM is far superior to almost anything that you can put on linux ( poor 5DWM project went away.. it was the salvation) For the end user 4DWM was simple, uncomplicated, and most of all fast.. I personally have several IRIX boxen that I wouldn't trade in for anything. The installation of free software http://freeware.sgi.com couldn't be made easier. recompiling the kernel ( one command) and the fact that when I stick in a second display sub-system it automatically sets it up for me. True the machines are starting to show wear and age, and for the most current hardware you are paing a fortune, but if you NEED a ferrari you pay for a ferrari, you don't take a Yugo ( PC) and stick a ferrari logo on it... There is the whole fact that IRIX is expensive, but you do pay for what you get. I can effectively use a R4000 or R4400 with the latest version of IRIX, and it runs just fine. Try that with a stock install of Linux on a machine that is 6 or 7 years old, you won't be happy.
I think it depends on your point of reference. When I worked as a student Unix lab luser, we just acquired a bunch of Indigos with 4.0.5f, and it seems fairly stable compared to what we were running in the lab before (HP diskless workstations (not even SWAP local.. don't ask)). If anything would happen, it typically would be a graphics hang curable with the Vulcan Death Grip.
The last job had a handful of systems (an Origin and a few Octanes): one Octane had semi-frequent graphics hangs but I think that was hardware on its way out. The other Octanes never had problems... and this was running typically pissey software (HKS Abaqus, PATRAN, ANSYS, ProE), either locally or over X/network (again, don't ask). These were systems running 6.5.x (all were at
My biggest beef with IRIX was the piss-poor default security. 4.0.x releases were HORRIBLE: things have become better in time but SGI's security for these boxes is still kinda shoddy at best. And with cheaper PC graphics hardware (or cheaper workstation-level graphics like HP's fx cards) SGI can no longer rest on their 'visualization' laurels.
-fester
-'fester
What killed SGI for us was their hideous treatment of customers. We had some SGI boxes with 10-Base T as web servers in the past. When we went to look at a 100-Base T card we discovered that all SGI wanted to do was to sell us new boxes. They priced then network card around $6000.
Irix is based on System V, it is nothing LIKE bsd... Irix's 64-bit'edness is dependent on the hardware that one runs it on, and porting recent opensource apps to it (at least 6.5.13 and back) can be quite a chore.
That said, it *IS* a wonderful OS. I have been an Irix user at home for over five years (has it been that long???) and overall since 4.0.5 back in my undergrad years (EH GADS, IT HAS BEEN THAT LONG!).
-johnny
http://www.martnet.com/~johnny
PS: As a side note, Irix has had it's fair share of security issues, but security is not SGI's primary focus... So it's somewhat understandable.
The newest SGIs support USB and a few (maybe just O3K?) have firewire. On the big iron, USB has been a *really* nice upgrade from PS/2, especially on machines configured with multiple graphics pipes and multiple users. Rather than installing extra BaseIO modules for additional PS/2 hookups for additional users, you can now just plug in as many keys/mice as you'd like, bind each set to a certain number of graphics pipes. Helps us keep our Onyx 3800 flexible... most of the time it's running each of its three graphics pipes seperately... we have a config that'll drive three sets of keys/mice for three users, one graphics pipe driving two monitors per user. But when we need the power, we have one user driving all three pipes on a single multi-projector panoram screen. It's not totally plug and play, but it's a lot easier than it used to be.
I preface this with the fact that I haven't worked with Solaris 9 yet.
If you want to do a custom installation of the OS, Sun's OS installer for version 8 IS HORRIBLE. I changed jobs three years ago, and I moved from a predominantly SGI environment to one that's predominantly Solaris.
The OS installation tools for IRIX three years ago still are BETTER than what Sun currently offers up in Solaris 8 TODAY. What's there is putrid and annoying. The IRIX installation allowed you to select packages based on package names and wildcarding, whereas Sun uses a number-based scheme, and the numbers change from monthly release to monthly release. IT SUCKS!!!!!!
We do a lot of customized OS installations (the most minimal core OS, plus some additional packages) for security reasons, and we don't have enough common system types to make the Solaris automated installation worthwhile.
I wish Solaris would join the 21st century in this regard.
It's actually a site for Eugenia to show how great she is, and for her to reference her other myopic posts. It's not a well-balanced look at anything, unless it's one of the rare 3rd party reviews she deems worth to sit alongside her personal reviews.
:(
At least it appears to be going in that direction rather quickly.