Slashdot Mirror


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..."

10 of 309 comments (clear)

  1. What about... by Sc00ter · · Score: 4, Interesting
    What happened to SGI's big push for Linux?? looking back at past SGI stories there's a lot there about Linux work.

  2. Do something with IRIX? by Highly+Motivated+Ano · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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

  3. I'm sure they've heard this before, but... by sam_handelman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:I'm sure they've heard this before, but... by lovebyte · · Score: 4, Interesting

      True, SGI is huge in scientific computing. But about 3 years ago, many scientific computing groups decided to stop using SGI (because SGI MIPS where not so fast, were too expensive and SGI itself seemed to be about to die) and move to Compaq alpha chips (for many applications they were the fastest chips, and by far). Ah! The same people are now puzzled about what to do or have gone to using Linux clusters.

      --

      I'll do it for cheesy poofs.

  4. "The OS looks dated" - WTF? by Gothmolly · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
  5. In other SGI news: by Sn4xx0r · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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?
  6. X11 credit's where credit is due by Diabolical · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  7. Irix: What Linux wants to be when it grows up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  8. Re:Mmmmkay... by uncleFester · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Seriously, IRIX is about as stable as Windows 95. Have you ever used it?

    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 .15 when I was laid off).

    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.

    .. but I do love the fact I own an Indigo2 now. :)

    -fester

    --
    -'fester
  9. IRIX isn't what killed SGI for us. by nutznboltz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.