Slashdot Mirror
SGIs Linux Future
james outlaw wrote in to send us a story at news.com that talks about SGIs
Linux Plans. We know about their Intel based Linux servers, but according to this article, they plan to
lead with Linux, and only offer NT as an add-on.
When they start shipping those Visual Workstations with Linux default, I'll definitely start desiring one.
You sad, pathetic and uninformed slashdot poster.
You also probably thought both Microsoft and Intel were going out of business 10 years ago because of the 640K 286 addressing limitation.
I really hope they port 4dwm and the tools that go along with it. Having that for a desktop is really neat.
bugbear3000 has had so many posts moderated down that he starts out at 0, along with all us lowly ACs. Perhaps this is an attempt to start over?
BTW, anyone know what happened to Ivan?
He got lucky.
Moving hard drives from one system to another with a different configuration without reinstalling the software is pretty touchy, since the software still "thinks" it's installed on the original system and has access to the same resources.
I can't believe that. He came to speak at our LUG meeting like a month ago. I was counting on him for a job at SGI.
<sigh> Oh well.. </sigh>
How many quarters has SGI been in the red and only now you are freaking out? You must be quite a terror in the markets!
Ahhh. I though *I* was the only one missing Ivan. Although I disagreed with about everything he said (which was usually quite insulting to whom he was responding), he was a lot of fun - and quite consistent, unlike the trolls to be found on /. nowadays, who seem only to argue in order to flame. At least Ivan tried to get his points through, no matter how, "interesting" they were. Let's hope he comes back at some point! Heck, I'll even take MEEPT back!
Respectfully,
Kevin Christie
kwchri@maila.wm.edu
Still if I was planning the unathorized sequeal of Titanic The Trip To The Bottom , I would love it & would take it with or without NT.
Kansas
...on how to get moderated down on /. You didn't even last an hour with your new nick. :-)
VW do not have very high memory bandwidth!
They do have high video/aux bus bandwidth, but that can be replicated in any pc with a good
video card (with not as much memory since
the VW can use all of main memory)
In reality bandwith available to the processor, is
actually a bit lower on the VW than on most PC's
(about 300MB/s vs 340 MB/s stream) 800MB/s raw.
if you want high bandwidth then get a
compaq XP1000, it has a 2.6GB/s bandwith available
to the processor.
or a compaq DS20, that has 5.2GB/s (aggregate) for
2 processors.
So if you deal with very high textured objects. (i.e greater than ~96 MB for most high
end graphics cards)
then the VW will be a good fit for you. if not
then getting a cheaper system with a faster graphics card will be better.
If you need a very fast floating point unit and
very high bandwidth. then get a compaq XP1000.
here are some stats.
(stream)
Computer Bandwidth SpecINT SpecFP Cost
VW320 550Mhz 300MB/s 23 16 $6000
XP1000 667Mhz 1.2GB/s 37 67 $8000
(alpha)
So if you run linux (you have the source),
why not get the XP1000 today (or the 750mhz version in a month or two).
or you can go to www.alpha-processor.com
and see when and where you can get a dual UP2000.
with 2 750mhz 21264 Alpha chips.
That will surely be a sweet system to run Linux.
(64-bit linux that is).
lets see if we do a linear fit of the the
SPEC performance numbers.
750 mhz alpha 21264
SpecINT = 42 SpecFP = 75
You would need a 1000mhz (1Ghz) PIII for the same integer peformance or a 2.5Ghz PIII for the same
floating point performance.
And trust me before you can buy a 2.5Ghz PIII,
there will be faster versions of the Alpha out.
Blah blah blah.
Nerdish sentiment aside, generally if you buy a machine like that you have an application or two in mind. And an application is an application is an application - the OS doesn't matter much.
NT is plenty stable for the type of apps you'd run on this.
Uhh, how expensive do you think NT is? 2 Linux for 10k or 1 NT for 10k?
Right...
Hi cweber, I tried netbsd/macppc (www.netbsd.org) on a g3 macintosh.
Suuper! I want to be using netbsd on onyx/indigo =8-)
I will not buy SGI if Linux is only supported OS.
I read these things lately about SGI offering Linux workstations and the GLX stuff, but what good is all of this if there are no decent 3D Applications? Are they just trying to build a platform first? I know there are plenty of GPL'd projects out there for 3D modelling and animation, but they can't compete with NT and Maya, or NT and Softimage, 3DSMax for that matter. An SGI Linux workstation is useless without the fantastic software they have.
Dear Clueless Anti-MS One,
You made me laugh. First of all, NTFS is a journalling file system. Second of all, either way this has nothing to do with NT bluescreening unless you mean in terms of disk recovery in a failure.
So, _where_ did they get the picture of Rick ...
with the moustache?? I really hope that he hasn't
grown that thing recently
Thats why they are helping linux update its video subsystems, so in a year or two it will rock on these machines.
The workstations are pretty cool in many ways and we have a few at work, but I still can't forgive them for putting in the pci slots backwards! That's too fucked up for me. They use a standard so they don't have to come up with their own and then they deliberately cripple it so all you can use is their overpriced hardware. Even Apple didn't pull that shit.
here
http://www.sunhelp.org/386i/index.html
If you want cheap pee-cee hardware then fine. Sun makes some of the highest quality around. How often do you hear of something going bad in an Ultra or Enterprise server, never. How often does PC hardware crap out?
I/O bandwidth....ITs the only factor to look at!
RAM..heheh (my PC can handle 784 if i can afford it)...
Processor! hah! ( can you say X86)
Hmm and of course the SGI Cases....wow
crap now i have to clean the drrooollll of the keyboard
BS - nt is way too lame for me.
No freaking way I'd let it survive on the box for any longer than it takes to insert the Linux install CD and boot the system.
Irix is cool, and so is Linux.
right -- "one of the most popular commercial UNIX operating systems for Intel based servers".
meaning what, exactly? there aren't a whole lot of commercial UNIX offerings for x86, ya know.
but they don't always spec the best hard drives...
We have about 1700 Sparc stations where I work, and the sound of howling spindle bearings is a familiar one.
I wish SGI made blue AT/ATX cases. SGI always made the coolest cases.
If they did this, I bet they could make a bundle.
I want a dark blue ATX cube case dammit!
Try Turbo Linux. It has some basic things compiled in and has SCSI and other like parralel port HDD/ZIP... compiled as modules. I can just tell, that when I recompiled the kernel it became not much smaller.
On setup it checks for awailable hardware and installs the system correspondingly. My feeling is, that if you insist it will leave additional options on, so they will be checked at every bootup.
This is my experience with Turbo Linuix 3.0.1, I heard they released 3.6 or something with 2.2.9 kernel.
Either that or just use a kernel rpm/deb/whatever
provided by your distribution. My
kernel-image-2.2.10 package works fine on
my day-to-day workstation. OTOH, I had to
manually compile in IP-Masquerading on a
Server
Too bad it's built like a cheap piece of junk, and it doesn't do PCI I/O worth a darn. A bit of a disappointment, I think, though SGI tends to do a much better job on the second cut. Hopefully, the 540 will be everything it's cracked up to be.
SGI will not ditch IRIX is what I have heard directly not only from 3 different SGI representatives, but also numerous other people. One of the main reasons is this: IRIX is completely owned and controlled by SGI. It is distributed by SGI, and the little boxes holding it cost $300 a pice (I know because I happen to have one of those little boxes sitting next to me). Basically they have total controll over it and they make money off of it, two things they don't get out of linux. Let's compare this to engines for cars, where the operating system is the engine and the car is an SGI MIPS based visual workstation or a server. You may include an alternative engine, but you will also want to include the old reliable engine that you make and whos developement you controll. Yes, the situations are different, but in ways similar. SGI has no plans of dropping IRIX, and no plans of brining linux the power to beat it at certain tasks. I'll bet in the future we will see IRIX doing all the same graphics type stuff, and linux more on the server like side, or perhaps the other way around. Either way, I see the demise of IRIX highly unlikely.
I forgot my login, so please point out the many obvious faults in my figuring to aeroxon@mountainmax.net. Thank you. And if anyone wants an sgi at the price of a mid range PC, I know where to get them.
fucking turd. jizz turd. fucker. cock fucker. shit sucker. shit! fuck! punk ass fucker. fuck you!
Kewl d00d, me too, Linux is k-r4d, NT sux d00d wow SGI r0x my chimpie.
Sigh.
This should shut your ignorant yap:
. html
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/990722/ca_bbrs_ra_2
Can you find a peecee that is fast as this piece of junk Good luck.
I have heard that the VisPC is faster than SGIs one O2 unix workstations (and costs cheaper)
I had the opportunity to use one of these work stations in a class on a solid modeling software this past week. It really rocked. Dual proc. 512 Mb RAM, NT though. Funny thing the software we were training on is a port from unix, but instead of being a port to NT it seemed to be a port to DOS then use an X server to display the tool icon panels and graphics window. Odd.
VW do not have very high memory bandwidth!
They do have high video/aux bus bandwidth, but that can be replicated in any pc with a good
video card (with not as much memory since
the VW can use all of main memory)
In reality bandwith available to the processor, is
actually a bit lower on the VW than on most PC's
(about 300MB/s vs 340 MB/s stream) 800MB/s raw.
if you want high bandwidth then get a
compaq XP1000, it has a 2.6GB/s bandwith available
to the processor.
or a compaq DS20, that has 5.2GB/s (aggregate) for
2 processors.
So if you deal with very high textured objects. (i.e greater than ~96 MB for most high
end graphics cards)
then the VW will be a good fit for you. if not
then getting a cheaper system with a faster graphics card will be better.
If you need a very fast floating point unit and
very high bandwidth. then get a compaq XP1000.
here are some stats.
(stream)
Computer Bandwidth SpecINT SpecFP Cost
VW320 550Mhz 300MB/s 23 16 $6000
XP1000 667Mhz 1.2GB/s 37 67 $8000
(alpha)
So if you run linux (you have the source),
why not get the XP1000 today (or the 750mhz version in a month or two).
or you can go to www.alpha-processor.com
and see when and where you can get a dual UP2000.
with 2 750mhz 21264 Alpha chips.
That will surely be a sweet system to run Linux.
(64-bit linux that is).
lets see if we do a linear fit of the the
SPEC performance numbers.
750 mhz alpha 21264
SpecINT = 42 SpecFP = 75
You would need a 1000mhz (1Ghz) PIII for the same integer peformance or a 2.5Ghz PIII for the same
floating point performance.
And trust me before you can buy a 2.5Ghz PIII,
there will be faster versions of the Alpha out.
Sure. They could do this at the printer's but let me try to clarify. You, the designer are responsible for specifying the color inks to be used. That's how it is --who else should care? The client yes, but the client is relying on your professional knowledge to handle his/her needs. The printer cares only as far as you have instructed him. They make things look like what you want --but you have to tell them what that is. The printer can take your RGB file and output, but it'll come out looking like shit when you go to your "press-check". Any further time spent in GIMP adjusting colors amounts to just more wild-ass-guesses. If you adjust colors at the printer (what you're suggesting I think) with his machines and his production guys --be sure, it will be billed at no discount! (If you had given them the CMYK values, separtions, your RGB file and a paper dummy it would be all on their dime to make their output look right.) Since you have negotiated what all printing costs will be for the client when you sold the job, you will just have to eat the extra charges. That's why you spec CMYK colors and send along CMYK color separations of your image (some people send actual Pantone color chips).
What's on the monitor doesn't mean anything. The actual ink color range is much less than what your monitor can produce, not to mention the fact that when ink sits on paper, the physics as well as the experience of color perception are completely different from looking at colors blasting out of a CRT gun. It's not just less, it's different --really really different. You're looking at solid color on a monitor,with each pixel having its own hue (an RGB function) but almost all printing (basically all printing) is done with CMYK color-process. Colors aren't solid. (You can't do large solid areas of color without the ink running all over the page and fouling the next sheet and the press along with it) They're composed of patterns of cyan yellow magenta and black dots on paper which is usually white-ish. Then you have issues of whether the paper stock to be used is coated or uncoated. A coated stock make the colors more brilliant, this can only be roughly simulated in a monitor, but a CMYK ssample chip makes the difference obvious. If you're not using and thinking in CMYK all the while you're working on a job, you're not even guessing. So what would come off the press at this point? You wouldn't recognize it. You'd freak out and schedule emergency time to have the production guys at your printer massage the colors ( yes --in Photoshop) and since you didn't do your job right, coming in without a clue as to how this job will actually be printed, it's gonna cost extra.
It is just impossible to overestimate the importance of color matching in graphic design. Exact colors are nothing less than identities to huge corporations. Think Coke red. guess how many people at Coke have to sign off on each promotional piece's use of Coke red ?(which is its own Pantone value) Quadruple your guess. Smart compnies try to market themselves to the point where you associate their name when shown a single letter --or a mere swatch of color. No matter how small, there is almost no ad outside of a yellowpages entry where the exact color is of no importance to the client.
Why is color conversion such a big problem? Because it is a big problem. And the industry secrets that allow image to ink conversion to happen in anything like a predictable fashion are not in the public domain. Threfore, GIMP will never have this unless it becomes a pay for play plug-in sometime in the future. Then you'd only need a OSS Quark clone to be in business --and a better GIMP.
Rather than hold our breaths waiting for these things to happen, why not petition Adobe for a Linux port of their software? GIMP is fine for home use but for Linux to be used for professional prepress/image editing, Adobe must be onboard.
Everybody says that for Linux to edge out established OS's in a given area it must demonstrate that it can do the job better, cheaper & faster. Outside of the server market the opportunities for this are pretty scarce. Here's one that is doable. Apple is not invulnerable here. Microsoft could enter this area if it wasn't for the fact that it would be construed, politically, legally as the last straw in the desktop wars, and also they have a little image problem: people in design deeply mistrust and despise MS. SGI, on the other hand, has almost mythical stature and respect. This represents a market where SGI's name is worth $!bank!$ --will they act on it, though?
Why not!! that just gives you more for software to choose from, and you would also have to consider that photoshop has a much bigger user than GIMP.
Alright this is going to sound really bitchy and arrogant, but ...The graphic design business standardized on Adobe (and Quark) long 'ways back (8 yrs). Seriously, Wordperfect and Lotus Notes have more lingering marketshare against bloody MS Office than Corel Draw or say Macromedia Freehand have against Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator.
I am unaware of any Quark-grade document formatter Corel might make --in case that was the drift of your question. Office Document formatting applications like WordPerfect are not the same kind of animal. Wordperfect or Word is like having a typewriter that remembers certain kinds of settings, using Quark is like assembling the components of your page by shooting them superimposed on one another -- any way you like-- in a photostat booth (the way prepress used to be done before the advent of digital compositing). Totally different applications for totally different purposes!.
The Corel lineup of products is not really competitive. By that I mean no personal judgment, I mean you can go a long time without hearing the name Corel. A Linux version of Corel products like Photopaint and Draw will be attractive to the same people who use Corel products now in businesses where the secretary does the annual report with clip-art, and to engineers with light report generating needs, and to Linux enthusiasts, but it will pass unremarked (literally) in the general graphic design business. Not because it's Linux, but because it's not Adobe (or Macromedia) and thus pretty much useless.
8 years is a long time for things to stay one way, I'd welcome a change. For one thing I'd like not to be tied to Apple computer for my equipment needs. But of all changes possible in the industry, Corel upsetting or even nudging Adobe just isn't in the cards. If anything Adobe is consolidating its position in print as never before now that they have a viable replacement for Quark. I just want them to spread some of that monopoly goodness my way in the form of an across the board Linux port. i can live without it, I just think it would be healthy for all the companies I care about. Meantime, here's an Linux Journal story about Linux in the prepress biz (server side) that'll make your chest swell with pride. Oughta be a feature story here on Slashdot.
Mac OSX the real deal, to debut on consumer machines at Q? in the year 200?, will use not Display PostScript but instead an screen rasterizer called Quartz which is to be speedier since it will use the lighter weight OpenType spec as its display font. Is this closer or further away from true onscreen PS than the present QuickdrawGX? I don't know. What it isn't is PS on the screen the way I understand Adobe proposed it and wanted it. Here is a niche for Unix/Linux. Apple won't use Display PostScript because home users want everything to be zippy and pretty and glittery? Fine, let Linux use it for professional document creation. Adobe shores up PostScript as THE standard without question for print production forever and ever. Which will suit me since the alternative standard will be/become a MicroStandard in the longrun. (MS is part-owner of Opentype specification). Plus superior screen to page translation appeals to me more than speedy screen drawing --in the same way that linux's stability is more desirable to me than the more consisent interface of Mac OS8.5. (I'd like to be able to save that file I just spent three hours on, y'know?) On that grim day, no OS or application that has not yet kissed Bill's ring will be able to so much as printout the MSalphabet on a WinPrinter anywhere outside of a NASA lab where they build their own laserprinters.
Any truth to the rumor that SGI is about to spin
off CRAY. (Sun being the taker of the poison pill).
SGI will continue to support IRIX.
There are such plans to "ditch" it as the original poster suggested.
Please stop propogating such falsehoods.
See www.sgi.com for new developments in 64 bit IRIX computing.
Visual Workstations, albeit based on an Intel Processor, represent quite :) ).
a new architecture and are definitely not PCs. In fact some of the ideas
employed remind me of the old Amiga (custom chips/unified memory pool/etc)
but with nowadays technology. It is interesting to consider that the Amiga was
quite an interesting machine for its time due to the way some shortcomings were
addressed (e.g. the blitter working on chip ram while the main cpu was busy processing instructions... just the opposite of what happens when you are going to need a cache
I belive that SGI's VW architecture is exactly the same sort
of breaktrogh technology for nowadays computers... Way to go, I belive!
I like your vision. It would be (IMHO) wonderful
if our Plug and Play support was as good
as Windows 98's is in some circumstances. An
anecdote:
My father recently bought an eMachine to replace
his Pentium 150. Not wanting to reinstall
all of his applications, he moved the hard drive
from the Pentium 150 over into the eMachine and
booted. Windows went through one of those
"Windows has detected new Hardware" screens for
about 10 minutes, rebooted twice (yeah, ugh!),
and then everything worked perfectly. The drivers
for the new sound card, video card, et. all,
had been loaded without a hitch. It's not that
easy with Linux. The database of hardware
currently being compiled should make it better,
though.
Visual Basic => for those who can't program
Visual Learners => those who can't read
Visual Workstations => for those who can't work, program, or read
They do have high video/aux bus bandwidth, but that can be replicated in any pc with a good
video card (with not as much memory since
the VW can use all of main memory)
In reality bandwith available to the processor, is
actually a bit lower on the VW than on most PC's
(about 300MB/s vs 340 MB/s stream) 800MB/s raw.
if you want high bandwidth then get a
compaq XP1000, it has a 2.6GB/s bandwith available
to the processor.
or a compaq DS20, that has 5.2GB/s (aggregate) for
2 processors.
So if you deal with very high textured objects. (i.e greater than ~96 MB for most high
end graphics cards)
then the VW will be a good fit for you. if not
then getting a cheaper system with a faster graphics card will be better.
If you need a very fast floating point unit and
very high bandwidth. then get a compaq XP1000.
here are some stats.
(stream)
Computer Bandwidth SpecINT SpecFP Cost
VW320 550Mhz 300MB/s 23 16 $6000
XP1000 667Mhz 1.2GB/s 37 67 $8000
(alpha)
One physical RGB->CMYK swatchbook costs about $100, (it can had for less) and they change from year to year. That's just the swatchbook (not software) to convert to CMYK --usable only if you already know the Pantone RGB values. Which you won't since you're using GIMP. Can you color calibrate a monitor to a Heidelberg press or a Lino-Hell drum scanner in GIMP? No. So you can't take a physical rgb->CMYK swatchbook and match chips to your monitor's colors and get anywhere close to what will come off the service bureau/printer's press. Your boss won't like this. Your client won't like this either. Problem.
Even supposing you had authorization from your manager and just had a burning desire to piss your printer off forever (thereby assuring your jobs always get lowest priority) by insisting on using this software without color management where's your integration with a standard pagelayout program --ie, Quark or Adobe's own InDesign? Nowhere. So there's your lesson for the day, now go tell all your friends what you've learned and don't ask such stupid arrogant, questions again --M'Kay?
Now you know I beg Adobe to port their software to Linux and hope SGI can help this eventually come to be.
How does this work? You can't put standard PCI cards in it?
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
Why should I believe one Anonymous Coward over another? Do you work for SGI? Do you have any more credibility than that other guy, nope?
I think that the Linux bandwagon is only just beginning to roll and there is room for everybody!
I see all the major manufacturer's of hardware jockeying to provide the best support for Linux for their hardware. I see manufacturers as contributing to the advancement of Linux and Software at the speed of the current advancements in Hardware.
Just think of the possibilities! A totally modular kernel using free AND proprietary modules for hardware support. A standard module interface that includes flawless PnP support as well as hot-swappability. Advanced clustering and both SMP and AMP capabilities along with high availability.
The mind truly boggles at the prospect!
P.S. Thanks SGI - I'm looking forward to a beautiful friendship.
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
However, I've not had such great experiences with Window's version of PnP.
:(
When I take a harddrive out of one machine and put it in another OR switch the motherboard, I usually get duplicated everything and it doesn't tell you which duplicate to remove... you have to reinstall Windows.
I can switch motherboards on Linux or move harddrives around with no problem whatsoever!
I wan't Linux's support to be MUCH BETTER than Native Windows PnP!
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
Visual Workstations (wish I had one) are designed for graphically intensive operations. They are OpenGL enhanced and have high graphical throughput.
The Visual Workstation is a perfect example of a company focusing on their core strength! SGI's core strength is graphics.
If SGI wants Linux on their machines, you can just about bet that they will be the driver (pun intended) behind advanced graphics on Linux - especially their own hardware.
I say more power to 'em.
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
Actually, Sun briefly sold the 386i, which was definitely x86 based. I've actually seen one. We used to have one sitting around the office as a conversation piece.
--
Sun 386i Models
---------------
386i/150
Processor(s): 80386 @ 20MHz, 80387
Speed ratings: 3 MIPS, 0.17 MFLOPS
CPU: 501-1241/1414
Chassis type: tower
Bus: 4 32-bit slots; ISA (3 16-bit, 1 8-bit)
Memory: 8M (documented) physical
Notes: Shared code name "Roadrunner" with the
3.5" floppy. A variant of the 150 had the 250's
external cache(?).
386i/250
Processor(s): 80386 @ 25MHz, 80387
Speed ratings: 5 MIPS, 0.2 MFLOPS
CPU: 501-1324/1413
Chassis type: tower
Bus: 4 32-bit slots; ISA (3 16-bit, 1 8-bit)
Memory: 16M (documented) physical
Cache: 32K
Notes: Shared code name "Roadrunner" with the
3.5" floppy.
486i
Processor(s): 80486
Notes: Code-named "Apache". A very limited quantity of
these were supposedly built and shipped to
customers just before the Intel-based line was
cancelled.
--
If there's a good upgrade path and they keep support for Irix for a long time, users might not resist so much. Remember Sun burned a lot of users, first with the switch to Sparc and then with the switch to Solaris. People got over it.
SGI might have a better time of it than Sun did because people buy SGI for the hardware. People buy Sun for the software.
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
You can make the case that Sun has a lot of brand equity in Solaris and should continue it. IBM can afford to sink money into AIX. But SGI's strength really is it's hardware.
I'm not saying they should drop Irix tomorrow, but a gradual shift makes sense. They can position themselves as the natural upgrade path for ISPs and others who outgrow their Intel/Linux boxes.
They've already released their filesystem. All they need to do is gradually transfer other stuff over to Linux and in a few years there won't be any reason to continue new development on Irix.
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
That was the 8086, not the 80286. The 80286 has a 24-bit address bus that can access 16 MB of physical memory. Actually, it's not even the 8086, which can access 1 MB of physical memory. IBM resevered the top 384K for the ROM BIOS and video frame buffers, hence the infamous 640K "limit".
Not that this pertains to the discussion or anything, but this is News for Nerds, after all. :-)
TedC
It's the "proprietary" hardware that makes an SGI what it is - the top of the line graphics workstation. Where have you been?
Do you know how much money SGI makes in "black funds" selling Cray equipment and services to the government? Research institutions? Hollywood? Medical fields?
It's a cluster of 48 128PE Origins tied together with an 800MB/s GSN (a.k.a. HiPPI) network. The individual Origin boxes are ccNUMA, of course, but the boxes communicate with each other using MPI over the GSN (much like Beowulf clusters do MPI over Ethernet or Myrinet or whatever). There used to be hardware specs on the web, but those disappeared after the China fiasco a few months back. This page gives some details.
--Troy
"My life's work has been to prompt others... and be forgotten." --Cyrano de Bergerac
I know that the folks at A|W keep tinkering with the idea for a maya port to linux. I know that where I work, which just migrated to Maya from soft image, wants the port bad.
I am responsible for the renderfarm, which is currently 02s and Octanes, and we are looking at getting intel machines, which transaltes into NT right now, and this does not excite me at all.
If/when the linux port is made, there will be several happy vegetables in Chicago.
--
Tim Toll, Render Architect, Big Idea Productions
-I just work here... how am I supposed to know?
No. It doesn't. NT runs pretty well on them
Okay...almost any movie now seems to be made on SGI's running Alias|Wavefront, Maya, or Softimage. And usually on the behind the scenes shows there is an animator talking about this and that sitting in front of an SGI.
Does this now mean that all these ubercool apps are going to be moved to Linux?
It's not like I could afford any of them, but this could be a big boon for the commercial Linux software arena. I wonder if it would help pull Photoshop over, or some NLE's?
Bit of a shame in some ways... however, I expect they'll effectively be giving lots of their tech to the open-source community. If SGI are dropping their support for Irix, that wouldn't be very nice to their some of their existing customers, because that means they are forced to port/convert. Some of you might think I'm nuts for suggesting it, but it's true. One of the many reasons Sun have been doing well is that they're quite clearly NOT moving away from SPARC/Solaris.
According to some people I talked to, SGI doing the Intel/NT Visual Workstations hasn't helped with their image with established customers. Didn't help either that they had/are planning to move from their own CPUs to IA-64. (basically, this makes them 'just another' Intel box-shifter in some people's eyes). Incidentally, the current CEO of SGI is an ex-HP (co IA-64 developers with Intel) exec. You'd be surprised what difference image can make. I heard of a Alpha based server Compaq were selling. They then decided to sell the same machine under the Digital brand. Sales increased 10x or something.
You don't want one *already*? I'd like one even if it had NT on it! Their hardware is just so danmed cool.
--
It still smells of Microsoft.
"Be nice, veer left, and never stop thinking" Iain Banks - Walking On Glass
Because the new one sucks.
Uhmm... like you said {NeXT/Open}Step uses DPS..
and MacOS X is basically the next revision of OpenStep..
So are you saying MacOS X doesn't use DPS?
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
What makes the Visual Workstations better than a Dell is their very customized video subsystems. I can't quote exact numbers, but the systems have ridiculously video high bandwidth, which makes them usable in video applications that traditional PC's would fall flat in.
Besides the video system, though, I think the rest of the appeal is the industrial design aspect. Cool looking (Non-translucent) cases, and sci-fi looking LCD displays.
I can't speak at how proprietary the hardware is, but if they write open source drivers for it so that they can install Linux, do you really care? Closed hardware doesn't bother me at all, but closed API's do, and if their drivers are GPL (or something close to it), and they don't try to close the thing up like Glide, everything is fine.
And it seems that they really are embracing Linux. Lets not forget their intent to release IRIX's journalling filesystem. This is no small deal: the lack of a journalling FS has been holding Linux back. Quite likely, they will phase out IRIX and slowly contribute to Linux those few high end features which it still lacks.
so that Linux can catch up to the big boys in the FS department. This is no small act, and I do hope that it is executed quickly.
With them releasing Linux boxes, we should atleast get drivers out of them (hopefully free), and hopefully they will support some of the big projects.
Anyone out there use these things for a living?
I don't want some lame, broken OS running on their cool hardware. That leaves NT right-out, now doesn't it? IRIX makes the stuff just a wee bit out of reach realistically- so I'll just wait and see if Linux shows. If it does, I know what I'm saving my pennies for... :->
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Avid Technology own Softimage - purchased from MS last year.
http://www.softimage.com
http://www.avid.com
Soft still runs on SGI's and I can't imagine they'll move to NT alone anytime soon. Too many BIG Softimage companies want the unix version.
-3! What?
It used to be possible to set the threshold in the preferences to high negative values. When that changed, I seem to recall that it was explicitly stated that (-1) was an absolute minimum: no post would ever have a score lower than that, so (-1) was equivalent to negative infinity for a threshold value.
If that is not the case, and posts can be scored lower than that, then there absolutely has to be a way to specify a threshold of negative infinity. Otherwise, there is no way to be sure of seeing absolutely everything.
For all I know, it's possible that this is a bug in the Slash code and not an intentionally unfair change in the rules. If so, it's pretty important that it be fixed.
David Gould
David Gould
main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
Did anyone else notice, or has it already been discussed, that in this article Belluzo says they'll be bringing ccNUMA support into Linux? ...
ccNUMA is definitely drool material - even better than Beowulf, and this would suggest that they are planning to have Linux running on machines in the 'Blue Mountain' (~6000 processor?) class
Seems to me that SGI may turn out to be the best thing to happen to Linux since usenet. After all, what have the three biggest (technical) problems with Linux been since it started getting mainstream acceptance?
1. Lack of a solid jfs
2. Lack of high-end graphics
3. Lack of support for *really* big, high-throughput hardware
All three of which SGI looks to be contributing.
I agree with the previous poster - you gotta love these guys.
"Images are incapable of repose." - Bachelard
When you add in the prices of the Microsoft / commercial versions of all the goodies that you get on a Linux CD... I'm sure it comes pretty close to 5 grand.
This seems to me to be a very general statement, hinting at the idea that SGI will support Linux all around, which would be a Good Thing(tm). They're working on getting Linux to support their architecture (more drivers...whee!), and they're trying pretty well to make Linux more accepted. That's backed up by this statement:
"We think Linux is important," Belluzzo said. "We think it's the operating system of the Internet. The opportunity is to make Linux more powerful, which we intend to do."
Sounds like a plan to me.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
Sun never made 386 based boxes. The IPC is a sun4c, same as the IPX and the sparc 2. Sun continues to make Solaris for x86 boxen, though its hardware support is, well, specific. Solaris8 won't even support ISA.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
How embarrassing ... since I work for Sun. Those suckers aren't even in the field engineer manuals. They must really not want to speak of them again :)
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
You answered your own question. I still think the new SGI logo looks like something you'd see on a generic toilet paper brand, so I'm glad to see the old one instead.
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
Apple was supposed to be bought be Sun a while ago.
Nope.
Ellison said he wanted Apple, too.
Nope.
Last year HP was buying all of sgi. Or maybe IBM. Now HP wants the workstations and Sun wants Cray ( yes that cray that lost 50% of its revenues from last year).
Rumors will always be around.
I saw the opening demo. If I remember correctly, they motherboard is SGI with their own memory and bus but using intel CPUs.
The bus is the key. It could move data many many times faster than your typical board. I wish I could remember the specs. I know it was in the Gigabits.
Romans 10:9-10
..it is promised by the year's end...
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
...my Q was about color separation capabilies of the Photopaint and Draw. I judged from the reviews, not from my personal experience, and it I remember quite a lot of very positive reviews for the Draw, when compared to Illustrator. Ought to be something in it then...
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
The new logo was designed to appeal to SGI's new
customers, ie PC NT users (and soon linux too,
as if there's a difference).
The cubes day has passed, but the old machines
live on.
So do I.. but it isn't the CPUs.. or the RAM, it is the bus speed... oh man do those things have throughput... *drool*
Looks like this rambles a bit, but hey it has been a while. Most of it is relevant I think...
The 320 initially was regarded as a "non expandable" propritatary solution. Over the last few months people have begun to see value in the hardware. Entry level machines have the same graphics sub system as do the full boat systems. You can get the whole box for the price of the Wildcat 3D card in some cases. They are expandable where it counts. You can add RAM, and CPU. These will directly affect the overall performance of the graphics system as well as other things. They also have the ability to fine tune the system in ways that their competetors cannot because they have created their own HAL for NT to run under. It is pretty obvious that they made the machine just the way that they wanted to, but are offering customers a choice as to what they want to run. Right now it happens to be NT. The CAD/Graphics community simply has more interconnectivity on that platform and that is hurting all things Unix. (Even though it clearly is better, faster, more reliable.....)
I find it interesting that the CAD users will look hard at compute/floating point performance, and less at graphics. The things that they do are simply not as demanding of the graphics as are the other 3D apps. The other competetors stand up to the SGI machines pretty well in this space, although SGI is now gaining a price advantage. Maybe those earlier problems with manufacturing have gone away?
The graphics people happen to like the box quite well. Given all the different features that are intergrated, they get a lot of bang for the buck. There is no beating the unified memory scheme for rendering complex things. Their own applications run quite nicely on their machines, and give a compelling price/performance ratio. I think that they are competeting quite nicely in this area. Many of the graphics people that I have talked to miss high end batch rendering and scripting though. NT is still NT, and that means being in front of the machine to do real work.
It is obvious that they have built this machine to run the OS that the customer wants to run, whatever that is. Over the next few years interoperability will become the dominant force in computing. Those that have Unix have been buying PC's because of this. I have said this before, but maybe it bears repeating. The real battle in both of these markets is not really against NT, but the applications that run on it. Office in particular. Once a company starts using it, then it is only a matter of time before Unix in any form starts to die in R&D, Engineering, and Graphics.
At least SGI is adopting a stratgy that allows them to provide computing flexibility where the customer wants it. Right now that means co-existing with NT, and many users that I know are happy to see it. For those lucky enough to be running X based applications, that means that they can utilize the reliability of SGI Irix, and the luxury of having one PC on the desktop. All of which could be SGI. When Linux hits, maybe a bunch of them will find a reason to run it on hardware that was designed to take advantage of it.
Blogging because I can...
Once you add SQL server and all the other crap, it get pretty expensive. Oh yeah, and the liceneses for the amount of connections, and the.... and the....
OK, here is my prediction (despite all the people who think SGI is in league with the devil, microsoft, Saddam Hussein, and Ronald Reagan):
SGI is(are*) the white hats.
That's right, I think that SGI is going to be a major player in making linux kick NT's buttocks. How? I think in 3-5 years they are going to open source most if not all of the IRIX OS. Considering their state right now, wouldn't it make sense that they JUST sell hardware and not worry about the OS part?
As one person I read put it, why buy 1 machine with NT on it for $10,000 when you can buy 2 machines with Linux (LIRIX??) on it for $10,000..... It makes sense for the hardware-oriented vendors (can anyone spell IBM?) to support Linux so there will be more HARDWARE and less SOFTWARE money being spent.
So b***h all you want about offices in Redmond and any other 'atrocities' you want. I think that SGI is going to be the company that comes out with the Linux fix for 256 SMP, an awesome file system, a cohesive GUI (tie GNOME and KDE together with Indigo Magic or something), high-end graphics programs, and enough other stuff to kill NT.
That's right, you heard me: if SGI does what I've described above, NT is dead. Long live Linux/LIRIX.
--
* I don't agree with the philosophy of seeing corporations as a corporate, anthropomorphic entity. It makes them faceless, like Microsoft....
I want one with an 19" LCD display please.. and 256Meg of RAM.. I must be dreaming. 2 CPU's please..
Only 'flamers' flame!
A prorpietary memory bus which gives them something like 3.2 GB/s bandwidth, shared with graphics card. Integrated video I/O, very nice, uncompressed 30 fps video capture. 64-bit PCI slots. They really aren't much more expensive than dell workstations. These things are pretty sweet.
Now I wonder, if they are really going full tilt with Linux is Alias|Wavefront going to be porting their software over? That would be pretty huge.
Q.
SGI has been taking emergency measures for awhile now, what do you think that Visual Workstation was all about? SGI has been hurting for awhile now, but it looks like they might be able to recover faily well if everything pans out the way they hope.
Q.
Because they are designed for Visual work; 3D graphics, video editing, modeling, etc.
Q.
Hey, you have the old sgi logo up, why not use the new one? (granted the old one looks cooler)
Q.
Even if CMYK is a bunch of proprietary, changing ink color values, editing is usually done in RGB. Then, it is converted to CMYK before it prints, because that is the color of the inks.
So why must this conversion be built into the graphics program? I think it would make sense for whatever driver software that comes supplied with a printer to accept RGB color values, and convert them to CMYK at printing time, according to whatever ink the machine is using. Or perhaps Pantone could sell a simple filter program that performs the conversion.
Even if none of this is done, a person right now could take any finished RGB image, and just open it up with photoshop and print it.
Of course, I agree with you that the way things are, photoshop is a better choice in business. A call for standards is definately in order (just like with everything else).
Vidi, Vici, Veni
May I ask why you have chosen the name of bugbear3001? This would not be to confuse your postings with those of longtime /. member bugbear3000, no? I notice the above is the first and only posting in your user history.
:-)
At any rate, regarding the technical merits of a VW versus a Dell, I suggest you look into the specs of the former. Not only as concerns the graphics pipeline, but also the ultra-high memory and system bus bandwidth. I can't compare the two very well, alas, because there really is no comparison.
If you can consider a Dell, however, then the VW is probably overkill for you. You don't get one of these boxes to play Quake, put it that way
As for SGI needing NT-- I suppose that's true, as things currently stand. A lot of customers are still demanding NT, and SGI would be remiss to not offer that choice. That says nothing of the relative merits of NT, however. If people demanded DOS, SGI would have DOS solutions. What is evident, however, is not only their strong support, but also ardent enthusiasm for Linux. (Coming from one of the premiere high-performance computing firms in existence, the compliment is very well-given).
they're dumping everything to ride in Uncle Bill's backseat
I see absolutely no indication of this. You may as well have said Microsoft was planning on open-sourcing its Windows accessory programs. Please substantiate.
(Actually, never mind. I just saw your "Kool-aid" posting below. You are obviously not here to discuss the topic at hand.)
iSKUNK!
"The opportunity is to make Linux more powerful, which we intend to do."
You've got to love these people. And drool over their computers.
You're going to have to save alot. I just cashed in a full 8 gallon jug of pennies. It was only ~$300 worth, though I did find some wheat pennies, and an off-center error.
uhhh...IRIX is a pretty hardcore OS. I use Linux ... mmm)
at work but most of the time I'm logged into
O200's w/IRIX6.4 XLV striping, the XFS filesystem, GRIO, these things just Rock! I'm
all for choice and so I actually enjoy having
all these different OS's around for different
things...NetBSD for firewalling & mail, Linux
for workstations (on a visual workstation
and for an Origin server I think I'll stick to the
OS that can scale to 256 Processors.
Like there's an, um, _multitude_ of systems? I count Solaris, UnixWare, OpenServer. All the others are irrelevant (from a "popularity" point of view). Number-wise, Solaris is quite irrelevant as well, compared to OpenServer/UnixWare (85% of the Intel UNIX market).
SGI is just going two directions with their product lines. With machines you put on your desk, SGI's long-term plans are Linux/NT on IA-64. With servers, they are planning to stick with MIPS and IRIX.
Take an example - with Indigo2 I am typing this on. In it's day it was pretty fast, but SGI can't compete with the price/performance of a fast-pace market like desktop workstations using low-volume chips like the R5000/R10000 and the IRIX O/S. So, go with IA-64 and Linux and put your knowledge of graphics into making them better.
Now take another example - the 4CPU R10K Origin 2000 in our server room. You need the scalability and reliability of IRIX. You have thousands of customers who have come to respect and rely upon it. As much as I like Linux, you aren't going to go replacing IRIX with it any time soon.
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
I just wanted to emphasize that mental ray has been available on Linux x86 and Alpha for at least a couple of years now.
Another major rendering package, Pixar's Photorealistic Renderman Toolkit AKA PRman may already be available for Linux as well. I saw a demo at ACM/SIGGRAPH'98
I just hope that the various 3D modeling and animation packages are ported to Linux as well. The Sidefx Houdini port is a great first step, but I'm hoping that Alias|Wavefront Maya and Softimage|3D are not far behind.
"Yeah well
cool demos
.com files from the takedown99 party (.com files are dos apps with a 64k memory limit) Amazing stuff with less data then this post!
:(
:)
well I don't know about the rest of the stuff, (I think they already have multiple desktops though).
if you want to see somthing cool on your box, check out scene.org a site dedicated to the Europian demo scene. The stuff is amazing, I've seen demos that have blown my mind, and this was on my p200MMX... in *dos* mode (no fancy 3d accell running). look at some of the 4k
there is an active Linux demo sceen as well, and products can be found at linux.scene.org.
another good site for demos is hornet.org, but they stoped updating the page last year
anyway, run this stuff on your computer, the good stuff will blow you away
_
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
I think what he ment was that beacuse of NT's jornaling file system, you don't loose the entire file system when the computer crashes, thus you are *very* glad you have one when the BOSD shows up. That point wasn't Anti-MS at all, infact it was somewhat Pro-MS.
_
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
what about web designers? they would never need to do RBG to CMYK, anyway. It seems a little rediculis to be foreced to use one particular graphics app just so you can print. I'm sure it would be posible to dump a .BMP file and then load it into photoshop on some old 486 to print, if all you need is color conversion.
:) gfx designers may just like it beacuse it's nice. I'd like to see a linux port.
I don't have much exspereance with the gimp. I'd like to get the win32 version sometime (or get linux installed (I'm wating for another hard drive, I don't feel like fips'ing my hard drive...))
Photoshop is an *amazing* peice of software though
_
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
hrm... and you baught a mac, yes you must be a very good judge of computer products....
_
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
Does anyone else remember the 386 based SUN boxes? I think they were IPCs?? Not sure. Anyways, the point is, SUN stuck its toe in and promptly pulled back out. I see SGI pulling back out as soon as they wake up. Existing PC users don't pay attention to SGI and if they did, would be thrown back by the price tag (I was). Workstation users would never sink so low as to have a *gasp* Intel chip on their desk.
They had a niche and seem to have chased a lot of people off. I think they need to find a new niche while still trying to preserve what is left of the old one. Linux could give them that new niche. I would love to have Linux running on a decent workstation. In front of SGI *hardware* has always been one of my favorite places to sit (Irix and its history of bugs makes me cringe). Give it a good OS and they could have something.
I realize there are a decent amount of posts about why this strategy is good for Linux, but maybe a closer look reveals why this is so good.
SGI, currently, has two things Linux desperately needs. The first is a journaling file system. I don't think I really need to explain why this is a good thing; all it takes is one bluescreen with NT and you'll understand me completely. SGI's is mature and stable, and has a very good reputation among the workstation community. Nuff said.
The second, IMHO, is even more important. SGI has (again IMHO) the most outstanding implementation of thread-level parallel processing. Almost all the other platforms you care to look at (IBM, older Sequent, Sun) either depend on MPI coding or are designed using close-coupled SMP, which tend to reach their limits quickly. It seems SGI has profited greatly from their acquisition of Cray Research.
SGI has a great thread library which they have mapped to their NUMA implementation, which scales a little better than SMP does (I'll skip the technical explanation here in favor of the point). SGI's extensive knowledge with multiprocessing comes at the perfect time for Linux, which is this very minute undergoing heavy kernel modifications to better facilitate thread level parallelism.
SGI has so much to offer in terms of technical skill that Linux could absorb at this point in time. Make no mistake, this is a perfect opportunity for Linux to milk the expertise from SGI, who needs Linux to survive.
The opinions I post here have nothing to do with my employer.
Actually, depending on your workflow, most editing is done in CMYK. The scans come back from the bureau drum-scanner in CMYK. Often RGB to CMYK is done at the bureau by a specialist scanner operator, sometimes targetted for a specific output device (a particular printshop's press).
It is more or less impossible to acurately proof on a monitor (without mega expensive calibration setups) and most designers 'do it by the numbers', ie from the photoshop info palette.
Also, there is no one method on converting RGB to CMYK, and 'apparently' there are some patents/trade secrets on the methods involved (I have not been able to verify this).
Pantone colours are used for spot colours, not process, and there are different inks used for process colour, sometimes depending on what country you are in (in japan they use 'toyo' I think).
In photoshop you can control very exactly black generation, undercover removal and a host of other options in the conversion process. Frinstance, going to Vogue uses a different conversion that going to newsprint (assuming RGB source). This is a bit of a black art and takes experience to get a good result, as no two presses are quite the same.
GIMP I think is more or less targetted for online graphics, and low end print jobs (soho?) where accurate RGB to CMYK is not super-critical.
Without accurate CMYK information and conversion it would be difficult to use it for professional print jobs.
The alternative is to send the jobs to the bureau in RGB and let the RIP do the conversion on the fly, but then you have little or no idea of what you will get until you receive a proof. Sometimes this is acceptable, but it is risky.
-- Reverend Vryl
For crying out loud, I already sent in the article in Forbes about how SGI has plans to SELL OFF their workstation line to IBM and their Cray subdivision to Sun. Hasn't been posted yet, and it's already way old news (7/1).
I've got two Origin 2000's (4x CPU, 4GB RAM, 100GB Disk, OC12 LAN connection), and an O2 Workstation (1600x1024 display, 250MHz, 320MB RAM) for the next 3 weeks for our OC-12 testing.
These things are _incredible_. The ease of use blows Linux away and the performance is unreal. I was able to do sustained streams of 49-50 Megabytes per second (_not_ megabits) between the two SGI's over the OC-12 connection. I can't imagine being able to do that with any of my Intel boxen.
The ease of use management wise on the SGI's is _unreal_. Irix very painlessly detected all the SCSI devices I attached, has a point and click logical volume manager, and the journalling filesystem _is_ hardy. Below the icing, the system is similar enough to linux that it's almost like coming home again. Just a wee bit faster.
http://www.bullnet.com
All systems based on MIPS chips will run Irix. Keep in mind that such systems tend to live far longer than your average PC. I expect to see MIPS/Irix-based boxes in operation (and supported by SGI) well after 2005, probably out to 2010.
However, SGI has publicly stated that they will migrate features from Unicos to Irix, and from Irix to Linux. Eventually, Unicos will fall by the wayside along with the systems it runs on. A few years after that, Irix will be discontinued. But this is many years from now.
I don't like the new one very much either. The typography is very "gimmicky". Having the letterforms one half curve-ended, and one half square-ended is just silly. And that "g"...eww...
I hope they would release it GPL rather than just ditch it.
If Linux is going to be default on Visual Workstations, those things are going to be _fantastic_. Wow.
Putting all our hype together (ie SGI + Transmeta+ Amiga+ Linux +Partnerships ) can we speculate that there will be a home based sgi machine running linux kernal (with transmeta as chip no1) with the little boing ball up front as their logo??
(Okay now and salt to taste, masha nd serve hot)
What this news sounds like is that since Linux is available at no cost, it will come bundled with the servers (why do people immediately start talking about workstations at this point?). Has NT ever been 'bundled' with the hardware? Is it costing extra anything new?
Who are these "SGI analysts" telling you to buy SGI stock? Would you rather invest your money with a sinking ship or the industry gorillas: MSFT, AOL, INTC, CSCO?
I thought Sun considered themselves a "hardware" company. Makes sense, though. They are the McDonald's of the computer industry. People go to McDonald's to buy $0.39 hamburgers, but McDonald's makes their money from $1.99 soft drinks (made from dirt cheap sugar water). People go to Sun for Solarias and free Java, but Sun makes money from their expensive hardware. Apple does the same thing. People buy Macs for the MacOS, but Apple makes money buy selling expensive, proprietary hardware. This is a great strategy. I just don't see what SGI is doing, though. SGI will sell people free Linux, but make money selling commodity Intel hardware (with some proprietary SGI video hardware thrown)???