Sun to Give Niagara Servers to Reviewers

abdulzis writes "Sun Micro's Jonathan Schwartz says that Sun is giving away free servers to bloggers who do a good job reviewing their servers. From the blog article: 'if you write a blog that fairly assesses the machine's performance (positively or negatively), send us a pointer, we're likely to let you keep the machine'" Mr. Schwartz, if you're reading this, feel free to send us one with "Attn: CowboyNeal" on the label.

Comments

Re:Server vs PC

[elmegil]

I'd rather get a PC.

I think there's a good reason your name is "BadAnalogyGuy". Can you say "you're not Sun's target market"? There are plenty of bloggers who aren't just some slashdot reader sitting in his parent's basement, but actually use real equipment in real datacenters and they're the ones Jonathan is probably trying to reach out to (can't read his mind after all). By all means, get the tool you need. Server class x86 systems are typically way louder than you'll want to play World of Warcroft on too.

Obviously no enterprise experience

[Fished]

Obviously, you've never been a sysadmin in an enterprise environment. First of all, I don't give a shit what kind of audio or video card a server has. In fact, if it's my server, it doesn't even have a monitor or speakers. Instead, it has a serial cable plugged into a terminal server, and that's all. All your fancy video card does is burn power and make heat that I have to spend money to pump out of the rack.

The difference between a server and a PC is:

1. A server is designed to serve data, and has nothing I don't need for it. That means that that damn video card that's not even hooked to a monitor can't break and take my website down with it's million dollars a day revenue.
2. A server is designed to serve data reliably, and has enterprise class components. That means no cheap-ass western digital hard drives. If you don't think there's a difference, you've never used Enterprise hardware.
3. A server is designed to serve data cheaply. This means low TCO, not low purchase price. Which means an OS that pushes the most bits per cpu, while requiring the least system administrator time. Is Solaris that OS? Debatable, since time has ensured that Apache is highly optimized for Linux. But if you can't run Linux on these yet, you will be able to soon. However, the CPU architecture on these is pretty highly parallel, and Solaris may work better than Linux. Sun is presenting some impressive numbers for these. And they're cheap (as servers go).

In other words, this may be a good time to buy SUNW, at least if you can grow a beard.

Re:Obviously no enterprise experience

[King_TJ]

Yeah, I basically agree - although what are these "enterprise class" hard drives you refer to? Last time I checked, companies like Sun were charging outrageous prices for hard drives that were just your run-of-the-mill Seagate SCSI's in proprietary hot-swap trays.

Sure, you wouldn't build an "enterprise server" with SATA just yet, but I'd say some form of SATA2 (or who knows, maybe SATA3?) will be the future replacement for SCSI. The hard drive makers are consolidating and IMHO, will soon reach a point where everything is either "budget priced" (EG. junk, suitable for PC resellers to use in low-cost systems for consumers and so-ho settings), or "better quality" which is used for everything from the largest enterprise systems to hobbyist PC's built with performance and quality parts in mind.

Right now, you pay a ridiculous premium for all things SCSI, simply because it's a dying standard, only used and respected by those building large servers for people with deep enough pockets to pay the prices without question. SCSI has disadvantages though, including the difficulty in making the high-density cables and connectors. (Ever try crimping a connector onto a SCA-80 cable, for example?)

The drives themselves tend to be built from pretty much the same parts as their SATA counterparts, lately. They can just stick a different type of controler board on the bottom and call it SATA vs. SCSI. We're no longer in the era where companies like Micropolis and Fujitsu built obviously better-constructed and better warrantied drives intended for server use only.

Re:Obviously no enterprise experience

[ciroknight]

"A server is designed to serve data reliably, and has enterprise class components. That means no cheap-ass western digital hard drives. If you don't think there's a difference, you've never used Enterprise hardware."

I think Google would argue with you there. They designed their business around not using expensive hardware, but instead the principals of RAID applied across all of their hardware (they believe it's cheaper to have a LOT of less reliable, cheaper systems than a few, super reliable systems). And it seems to be working brilliantly for them.

I'm not saying it works in every case, but I think you're just complicating the issue; A server is a machine that serves data. Whether it be a $300 Dell box running a copy of Win2K serving up some libraries index server or a multimillion dollar, grid cluster of Apple XServes running OS X Server serving up a database for your customer service department, the key element here is that the machine is serving the data.

So, going back to the grandparent's issue, there really isn't much stopping a current PC from being a server. A server is a role not a item. In this specific case, the Sun Niagra Servers are high power, high throughput machines, tasked better for a mega dollar installation where speed is critical, or in your business where uptime seems to be the more desired feature. But as Google has shown us, it really isn't the box that makes the application, it's the programmers.

Re:Server vs PC

[Brandybuck]

So I get a server from Sun. Does that just mean I get a fast computer with a shitty audio and video card? Limited expansion slots?

I don't know anything about these Niagara servers, but if they're anything like other Sun servers, here's what you'll get: a power supply that will last longer than two years; a motherboard with a chipset and layout designed for high high data throughput; harddrives that are hot-swappable and will handle years of heavy use without crapping out; etc. In short, they're designed for constant heavy use and high reliability. You can get away with Best Buy's weekly special for a small file or web server, but once it starts handling mission critical data, you'll want a server that was designed to be a server.

Yes, you can avoid the eMachines and build a kickass server yourself. But that's not what companies want, they want them prebuilt with warranty and service.