Slashdot Mirror
SGI to Build Commercial Linux Supercomputers
jfinke sent in a link - as did many others - to a brief Yahoo News story about SGI's plans to move into the parallel processing supercomputer marketplace with Linux as their base OS. "We're really pumped up about it," said Beau Vrolyk, senior vice president of SGI's
product group. "It represents the beginning of a whole new generation of
supercomputer."
Had to be said.... BEOWULF! Okay, mark me down now. =)
--
Another great victory for Linux! Linux's growth & world-wide-awareness grows exponentially with each new announcement like this. And it's great to see main-stream, "old style" companies like SGI adopt Linux. Now let's hope that IBM starts shipping only Linux machines w/ Apache web server software...
-cf
So, the article says that SGI did a demonstration with Itanium chips. Is this true ? I thought that Itanium was only available in simulators ( that's how they're developing Linux/IA-64 ), no silicone yet.
Anybody care to elaborate ?
Actually, it seems that what they're selling is comparable to a Beowulf cluster (if not actually a beowulf cluster). I don't remember the actual quote, but they say that unlike traditional supercomputers, this one is actual a group of 4 computers with Intel Itanium (still sounds funny to say that) processors.
So, how many companies are demoing computers on this chip? And w/ what OSes? (I know, I'm sure this has been gone over a thousand times, but I wasn't paying attention.)
-- It only takes 20 minutes for a liberal to become a conservative thanks to our new outpatient surgical procedure!
This is great news for the Linux community. However, how can we be sure that SGI wont create a proprietary distribution for its parallell processing systems that may fragment linux?
"Dancing is the vertical expression of a horizontal desire" --Robert Frost
Sorry guys, but I believe SGI needs some mindshare, and that's why they are doing this. Irix scales much better, and so does Solaris and UnixWare. But, granted, they are not as "hot" these days.
It's a good thing for Linux and SGI, but not because Linux is such a good SMP OS.
OT: I have just read they are selling Playstation here in Helsinki for 700 FIM (~145 US$) Do you think it's a fair price?
Sigged!
We should see more strength in the PC SMP for linux, *bsd areas. Especially if everything is GPL'ed as I guess it would be...
---
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
in Canada they go for 140(bout 95US)
This doesn't really bear reading, does it?
I forgot to see if I won that spankin' new linux server they were giving away. The drawing was on the 12th.
But seriously, this gives me a great chance to laugh at my boss. I hope that this means new and better graphics tools for Linux like 3D studio Max and the like. Also, with SGI on board we might start seeing linux support for some of the high end rendering tools, and this will help greatly with linux multimedia development. I am just soooo friggin' happy! I won't have to reboot between tracings of my 3D models now like I do if I use an NT workststion....
~Jason Maggard
I am a little wary that this may just be a publicity thing. SGI has spun it's Cray division, and wasn't that in part because it wasn't as successful at they had hoped.
Linux may be full of hype right now, but if they weren't successfully with an already established supercomputing platform (ie. the Cray), how will they manage with something new.
On the bright side, even if their endevour fails, perhaps we'll get some cool new (and hopefully GPLed) stuff ported over to linux.
Dana
Intels new chip is out there... many developement companys now have them.
A lot of SGI's products (the open source ones) are aimed as toolkits for system management, or are aimed at increasing performance and stability (XFS).
One such project is a toolkit for obtaining system performance statistics. They write the toolkit, and give it away for free, and then they write the management tool that sits on top of it, and sell that!
And how better to know just what your cluster of machines is doing, than with monitoring software? And produced by the same company that sold you the hardware? Why not?
By giving away the toolkit (and it's source), you end up with free improvements, free ports to other platforms, and toolkits that monitor stuff you may never have even thought to monitor in the first place, broadening the scope for your product.
Even without SGI, Linux is becoming more scalable with each release. Now SGI is investing real money in the Linux kernel. They're working on projects aimed at implementing the best features of Irix under Linux. It won't happen overnight, but it won't be that long either.
It makes a whole lot of sense financially (especially for a company that needs to cut costs). They can let the Linux community take care of all the mainstream features that every OS must have, and SGI can focus on the handful of things that are really important to their particular market. Even if SGI ends up being the only maintainer of ccNUMA for Linux, it's still cheaper than having to maintain the entire OS.
The other exciting thing about Linux is the mainstream applications that are emerging. I know people don't buy an SGI box to run spreadsheets, but it's nice to know that you don't have to keep a Windows PC around just for the odd time you want to run an office productivity application. Linux lets SGI ride the wave of new mainstream developments while still catering to their niche market.
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
I was hoping (after reading carefully) that it's actually not beowulf, but some ingenious SGI soluiton. Beforeyou flame my head off, let me explain: I find it quite difficult to program for beowulf. It's hairy enough to use kernel threads.
Or is it just me? Is my laziness factor above the average?
Sigged!
I'd take this as evidence Intel gives the you best bang for the buck.
As an owner of a MIPS-based sgi, I don't think sgi is for linux/open source as much as they'd like us to think. I believe this for several reasons-for one, even on their older mips based sgis, they don't seem to want linux(with a working X) to be running on them. Also, beyond Jesse and the kernel dump analyzer tool, nothing has come out of them. Secondly, As several people have pointed out, it really is kind of stupid for sgi to sell linux-based supercomputers(see the other posts to clarify).
I hate to say it, I think sgi is using Linux as a advertising thing...
for those who say that this demonstrates sgi's deep commitment to Linux, think twice...look at the status page, and you'll see that it hasn't been updated in months! So no progress in the MIPS version of Linux.
just a little rant and raving to make me feel better...I've been really frustrated with my IRIX box the last couple months :-(
Irix is a much more robust and scalable system than Linux. This may change with time, but for the present, it is true; Linux is still lacking in the multi-processor area. And as for Enterprise, well - Irix is proven in the enterprise, whereas Linux is still be looked at as less-than-ready.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
foogle, maybe you dont work in the real world...
intel quad xeon outperforms sgi origin 2000 by over 300% in all areas, and Linux is far more scalable than IRIX. Look at the benchmarks/articles by Alan Cox that prove Linux SMP in 2.4 kernel blows IRIX and Solaris out of the water.
we wont even mention how xeon / Riva TNT workstations make SGI Octane/Onyx2 3d machines look like toys...
LiNuX MaN
I think this is an important point.
When NT started to (self-declaredly) encroach on what had been UNIX workstation territory 3 or 4 years ago, one of the arguments that MS made on its behalf was that people wouldn't need to have a separate box on their desk for common office (read "MS Office") tasks.
This aspect is one of the things that was hyped in The Analysts' reports (Brown? IDC?) finding lower TCO for NT than for UNIX machines. Now that there are some Web-based application suites semi-available (and more poised to be really available RSN
StarOffice, for Free? Heh! Running on a multi-processor SGI sytem? That sounds just about right
timothy
p.s.(And one day there will be a funny graph of IDC opinions, with an inflection point around this year
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
You tell a bunch of SGI suits macos is great and wonderful, and theyll sell sgi branded macs. SGI is desperately trying to stay afloat, and have gotten to the point. Their market cap is now less than half their yearly revenue (as opposed to rhats market cap of 600X revenue).
SGI has had one profitable quarter in the last 3 years, and it wasnt from Intel, it was from selling their high end MIPS servers. You think people who buy those machines will now touch them with every SGI suit screaming how crappy it is because someone told them Linux was better than IRIX? SGI has nobody internally to tell them that while it may be great to support Linux in whatever fashion, pissing off your revenue stream will kill you faster than anything.
How many of you people have been buying SGI's Intel/Linux servers? Im sure its alot less than they expected, and alot less than the NT models.
If SGI dies because they dumped all their eggs into the Linux basket, thats sure going to make people think once or twice about following SGI.
Supporting Linux is great and all, but SGI expects that the linux community will support its effort by buying its hardware, and I just cant beleive that will ever happen. We wont see exactly what effect SGI doing the about face will have until the numbers come out, but Im sure it wont be pretty.
I've got a TNT card in my PIII, running Linux, and while it's a pretty nice setup, it's not a replacement for an SGI system. Just having a Mesa setup won't do it. You need the software and Linux just hasn't got it yet.
As for the benchmarks: Well, I trust Linux benchmarks by Alan Cox about as much as I trust NT benchmarks by Microsoft.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Please ignore.
Oddly enough I got a call from SGI yesterday.
They wanted me to come work for them designing
ASICs... now what work would I possibly have
if SGI is building everything out of commodity
parts (as they claim) and what little work left
couldn't be done by existing inhouse engineers?
Are there any left? Do they have better products
planned? (ie better than diddly PCs)
I have no idea. Nor do I care to find out. SGI's
attempt at passing off mediocrity as innovation
is disheartening, with Linux, as with NT, when
it comes to PC's, and their design methods, it's
all the same in the end. You're putting price before all else, and you'll get what you pay for.
>OT: I have just read they are selling Playstation here in Helsinki for 700 FIM (~145 US$) Do you think it's a fair price?
I don't know what the average price for a PSX is in Europe, but they've been going for 99 dollars here in the U.S. for just about all year.
Ob:
It's an operating system!
It's a cynical ploy to raise stock prices!
Stop! You're both right! It's Linux!
Seriously...what is it that Linux does that Irix can't do as well or better?
--
"HORSE."
"HORSE."
-Flaming Carrot
Just wondering...
It seems you're just as bad as the "Linux" guy.
Alan Cox and Linus have done more for modern computing than anyone else, period.
Alan Cox has more coding talent and knowledge than the entire development team at Sun/SGI/HP/Microsoft combined!
if Alan did the benchmarks, then the benchmarks dont lie.
Linux on MIPS has never been a priority for them. Remember, SGI is shifting all their operations to Linux on Intel (not all at once, but that's the direction they're headed). It doesn't make any sense (for them) to port Linux to MIPS-- they already have IRIX for those machines.
In any case, don't forget that a lot of people within SGI like Linux a lot, and are very enthusiastic about working professionally with it. Given SGI's creativity-powerhouse culture, it makes perfect sense. I think Linux has a very good friend in SGI.
Not that that would leave you with much hope for Linux on your machine, but hey-- IRIX's cc is awesome for debugging (with -fullwarn). What other compiler will tell you "variable foo was set but never used?"
iSKUNK!
Cox is a top notch technical guy, not a politician, and he calls a spade a spade - Where do you get off trashing him like that?
I'm sick off all the companies that "jump on the Linux bandwagon". Linux isn't a bandwagon, it's an OS, a tool for work and play.
It seems that when a company hits a dead end, it turns to Linux to liven up the spirit. Do they really have a great interest in Linux? Or are they just trying to save their butts?
monkey boy sez: "How many of you people have been buying SGI's Intel/Linux servers? Im sure its alot less than they expected, and alot less than the NT models." I don't know if you've been under a rock or what, but sgi's pee cee line was a miserable flop. Everywhere they demoed them, people would say, "er, that's cool I guess, but hey, can we get some of those with Linux instead?" They are dumping their unprofitable and disappointing "nt" pee cee line, moving back to their Unix roots, and getting behind Linux in a big way.
You write: Irix scales much better, and so does Solaris and UnixWare.
... devastating to anyone that doesn't jump on the bandwagon that is. Development and post-sales maintenance/support are extremely costly overheads for any manufacturer, so a decision which massively reduces that expense makes great economic sense.
Whatever systems happen to scale better today, Linux and the free BSDs will scale better than anything else tomorrow, simply because there are 10 zillion developers beavering away at them continuously.
Furthermore, this continual and rapid improvement will happen regardless of whether or not SGI invest any development time of their own. The economics of this are devastatingly obvious
Furthermore, with Irix behind them, SGI have the pedigree to stand out in the Linux marketplace despite the eventual dilution created by GPL licensing of their enhancements. I doubt if they'll lose many of their old customers, and they are bound to acquire many new ones from their new and greatly expanded Linux audience.
With this move, I reckon that SGI have their future assured at least until the competition wises up and catches up, and as long as their marketing, pricing and distribution is similarly forward thinking. But that of course remains to be seen.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
I remember when SGI acquired CRAY.
Maybe SGI planing or company strategy says something about
"Generate value opening new markets for supercomputing"
But then, with a really interesting goal and big budgets to acomplish it, they don't believe in their own projects and them spoil great ideas...
I just think that this kind of R&D should be put in paralel with current activities that feed the company, and use them (when developed) to make the old, main activity grow and become more profitable.
I'm sick of Fancy annuncements from SGI that end up being vapour. I'm really starting to think that their goal is to jump in any "HOT AND NEW" thing without being really convinced that this will generate real value for them...just the clasic temporary rise in stocks...Wall Street tends to be very stupid sometimes...
I Hope this is not the case...
Go Cray!
And you say IRIX can't scale? Hahaha.
I cannot say with certainty that this article is about the same machine I'm thinking of, but...
SGI recently finished a Beowulf for the Ohio Supercomputer Center, and has put it on display at SC99 before actually delivering it to OSC. 128 Xeons for computation (32 SGI 1400L's, each with 4 Xeons, with one more 1400L as an admin node; Myrinet interconnect).
Since Itanium hasn't actually been released yet, I expect anything anyone debuts in the near future built around Itanium is only debuting 4-color glossies. But, that is the first step before debuting an actual product built around a brand-new processor.
Christopher A. Bohn
cb
Oooh! What does this button do!?
The power panel needs some work, but we have a Cray Y-MP here. Here being the garage. After I get it fixed up it will need a copy of Unicos. This thing was ex-government property picked up for $600. I put in $400 and a friend put in $200 on it the day we found it.
I don't know what to do about the operating system though. I suppose I can try SGI, but I've dealt with them in the past when I got a load of 4D equipment (4D/480s, 440s, tons of 35s, etc) and they just blew me off. All I was asking for was the IDF (Iris Developer Foundation) for IRIX 5.3. You cannot run gcc w/o it. We've already pirated the IDO CDs though, so it's no big deal, but I still trust SGI will be jerks about Unicos. So until then the box (used loosely) rots and I only have a BRI ISDN line anyways.
I am encouraged by this move. SGI put themselves much in my skepticism when they changed from "Silicon Graphics" and started developing NT stations, but have since had another change of leadership. I have been looking for clues that they were back on the right track. I don't know that this is one (a clue, that is), but it lines up with other movements that I like.
Specifically, the fact that Alias|Wavefront is putting out a Maya render engine for LINUX tells me that graphical tides are turning. An editor cannot be far behind. And I have been very happy with the Alias and SGI combinations I have worked on in the past. If the quality and robustness of graphical interface is there... 'twould be nice!
But don't mistake me -- I still don't consider him an objective source for benchmarks. It's nothing personal, but I'd rather see it done by someone without a vested interest.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
No offense intended here; this comment is meant to be about 25 deg C, and is just a clarification for what seems to be a common misconception.
No application can make use of a parallel computer without a programmer first identifying the inherent concurrency. There are pre-processors that attempt to do this for you, such as BERT 77, but IMO that cannot replace the intuition and basic understanding of the problem that a human programmer provides (with all due respect to Doug & everyone else at Paralogic). Once that concurrency is identified, then implementing it using the MPI or PVM API, or using HPF directives, or using pthreads (depending on your platform) should be fairly straight-forward.
Computers are not magic! You cannot feed a program written for a sequential computer into a parallel computer and expect speedup, period. At run-time, the computer just doesn't have sufficient view of the application to even attempt to identify the concurrency for you, and it certainly doesn't have the cycles to spare to decide what aspects of the concurrency should or shouldn't be parallelized. The best you can do if you won't or can't parallelize your code is to submit multiple instances of the application, with different inputs, to the batch scheduler and obtain a greater throughput.
Christopher A. Bohn
cb
Oooh! What does this button do!?
Does anyone know what's the difference between this and Beowolf cluster, and traditional supercomputer like Cray? Can this new cluster do the type of parallel computing task Cray does and do it faster? It would be incredible if the answer to second question is yes!
In an interview over at the ZDTV booth today, Linus was asked what the hardest task that he is planning on adding into the Kernel. He stated NUMA (Non-Uniform memory access), and who uses ccNUMA? SGI.
I've got the feeling that SGI and Linus are well in communication.
I'm thinking in particular of the Blue Mountain machine at LANL -- this was/is a big set of SGI Origin 2000 boxes; I don't actually remember offhand, but I seem to recall that they ran Irix, etc, and used typical MPI message-passing crap for most applications. Never mind. Anyway, point is that there were some problems with getting a linear performance increase on the machine as more and more processors were added; we're talking, incidentally, of thousands of processors. Some problems were to be expected -- clearly it's naive to expect totally linear speedup as you increase the number of processors, even for extremely well parallelized code. But some of the things we saw were just ridiculous -- there was, for instance, a sort of catastrophic breakdown at about 4000 processors; this has probably been solved for some time now, but not without an awful lot of work being done to do so. For some more info about this, check out this page at LANL, among others.
Don't get the impression, btw, that I'm against SGI getting into this area -- I happen to like the company quite a bit, think they have some extraordinary products, etc etc. I'm just a little wary these days when I see them talking about massively parallel machines.
Cheers.
Linux is at a major disadvantage here... it only supports course grained/one-to-one thread mapping (one thread to one process). More scalable systems, like Irix and Solaris, use a many-to-many mapping (groups of userland threads mapped to multiple kernel threads/processes).
Is there any plans to correct this deficiency?
--
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will deserve neither and lose both."
"It is better to die on one's feet than to live on one's knees." - Albert Camus
The Irix machine I was using this afternoon had 512 processors and 192 gigs of RAM. Yes, it was an Origin 2000. Let's see you boot Linux on that. What? It gets clobbered because there are places still that lock the entire kernel? What? I can'd dedicate processors so they don't service I/O interupts and only run user code which reduces TLB misses and page faults? What? I can't run real time jobs simultaneously with normal jobs because the kernel can preempt my real time ap? Sorry - 4 processors is not "scalable". When you can boot it on 512 processors come back and I'll be impressed. I'd also be impressed to see you run the code NASA runs on our machines that uses something like a 256 gig single address space under Linux. I work at SGI so I will avoid flattering Solaris by pointing out that it can boot on 64 processors and is more scalable than Linux too (but not more than Irix :)
As for stability and security, I would not highlight Linux as the pinacle in either of those areas either. IBM's OS/390 is probably the best. At one point (don't know if this is just a rumor) I heard they had a system with an uptime of 20 years! Now *that's* uptime.
I won't comment on the Riva TNT vs. Infinite Reality II on Onyx II because my expertise is in kernel design not graphics, but I suspect you're as far off there as you were in your first statements.
So I'd say you're the one who doesn't live in the real world. Take a kernel architecture class and come back.
(For the most scalable OS out there, you'd probably have to go with Unicos/MK which runs on the Cray T3E which can boot a single system image on 2048 processors). -- fgodfrey@bigw.org The statements here are my own and SGI will laugh at you if you attribute them to SGI.
Last night the Vancouver Linux users group presented a talk by Dr. John Mashey from SGI. It was a very interesting talk, and convinced me that SGI does "get it" and is truely dedicated to Linux and the open-source concept.
I don't think that MIPS/Linux is a priority for SGI. They see MIPS/Irix at the 'top' of the market, and Intel(x86 and itanic)/Linux at the 'bottom' but moving up over the next few years. They know it's coming, and they'd rather spend resources to influence its development than be a passive by-stander as they are with NT. So, they feed features and ideas from IRIX into Linux, while continuing to sell and maintain the high-end IRIX systems as long as there's still a market (which consists more of corporate uses like automotive crash-test simulation than of TV and movies).
He also said that several of SGI's customers want Linux, and want certain features in it (like raw I/O for big databases). So, SGI either helps develop this and keeps the customers, or loses them.
The XFS filesystem is one of their major contributions, and he said that one of the main delays there is that they are going through the code to remove any sections that could cause patent headaches in the future. One hopes the result will be slightly more usable than the initial Mozilla...
---
disclaimer: these were my impressions of Dr. Mashey's talk; they may or may not actually represent his views, which may or may not be those of SGI.
as another nail in SGI's coffin? This will get them some attention but unfortunately not get them much business. I don't want Linux on a super computer, it would cease to truely be linux if you changed it enough to actually work as a super computer. What makes a computer super is not it's total operations in a second but how efficiently it handles those operations. Crays use(d) vector systems, the chips are mostly SIMD circuitry which means you can get more usable data from a single instruction. Until recently PC class chips had never touched SIMD, they were all SISD circuitry. This means the chips in Crays were the opposite of what a PIII is today, it was mostly SIMD circuitry with small SISD units (where the PIII is mostly SISD with one or two SIMD units). Besides the actual hardware difference, Linux just does not have the super computer mentality. Irix was designed to scale on hundreds of processors and address hundreds of gigs of RAM, Linux makes poor use (comparitively) of only hundreds of megs of RAM. If Linux were tweaked by SGI's old Irix people (do they even work there anymore?) it would really cease to be Linux. You have to remember that Linux was originally designed to be a flavour of unix that ran on PC architecture, not power hungry-underground complex requiring mainframes. This is no kind of slur against Linux it is focused on SGI. It's a shame they have been reduced to trying to get under someone else's PR umbrella to make headlines. If someone offered me the choice of an old Origin 2000 or one of their Linux super comps I would go for the Origin based almost entirely on principle.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
So Moderators, can you rate the clueless question down, please?
Er... As an owner of a MIPS-based SGI too, I need Linux on it like I need a hole in the head. I'm happy to see SGI support Linux on the Intel platform, but I don't particularly look forward to or care to see Linux on MIPS, for whatever long MIPS has left, which may not be that much.
I understand that maybe IRIX isn't the best OS around from a security standpoint, but as a workstation OS for a single user, is absolutely peerless, with only BeOS and the AmigaOS coming close (although I have no first hand experience of Solaris, I'd be happy to add it to the list).
"Be nice, veer left, and never stop thinking" Iain Banks - Walking On Glass
Sun, SCO/IBM (Monterey), Mickeysoft (rumors have it that itactually doesn't boot at all), HP ?
Sigged!
Why do you need this in cc whats wrong with using lint:
braveheart.UK$ cc -Xc notused.c -o notused
braveheart.UK$ lint notused.c
argument unused in function
(3) argc in main
(3) argv in main
set but not used in function
(5) foo in main
braveheart.UK$ cat notused.c
#include
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
int foo = 1;
return 0;
}
Two big firsts on IA64 for Linux and I think it's a great indication that Linux will be the first released OS for IA64.
Some more info:
sgi's announcement
Project Trillian which is porting the linux kernel to IA64.
Who cares? SGI uses Linux, Linux uses SGI. It's the way I use women. I get what I want. The dames get what they want. Even Steven. That's life.
Note that what you are proposing is not all that simple: _increasing modularity_ and reworking the _SMP_ scalability of the kernel invovles _major changes_ to the kernel structure. Here lies a great risk - that the changes will be so sweeping, that the linux kernel structure will fragment: we'll have the "Linus" kernel, and the "SGI" kernel. Hopefully if this happens, the changes will merge into Linus's kernel quickly, otherwise if SGI release their changes to quickly we'll have irreversible fragmentation.
Just took a look at the original press release
Christopher A. Bohn
cb
Oooh! What does this button do!?
now, more that ever, the new logo applies.
Can't resist this though, how many SGI O2ks are in the top500.org list compared to intel boxes...
One last thing, I've got enough balls to post with my identity; only scared little liars are afraid of standing behind what they say.
And I can download 2.4 where? Oh..
The message SGI is giving the market is indeed that IRIX may be sufficient now, but with a bit of effort Linux wiull probably surpass it. Anyone who'd been considering buying SGI will now go to someone who's 100% behind their systems (and I'm sure there will be many current customers who'll shift because of this as well). Idiots.
They switched from Sun News to MIT XWindows when that was necessary. They tried NT, but that failed to compete with commodity computer companies. Now they are trying Linux. hope that succeeds.
Why would SGI use Linux for supercomputers? I mean, I am a Linux fan and user, but let's face it, UNIX is still better than Linux as far as quality; in this case IRIX. SGI has been using IRIX for this sort of thing very successfully for years. So why would they use Linux for a supercomputer?
The answer is, they wouldn't. SGI is doing this as a marketing thing because they want to make Linux people like them and they also want to promote Linux so they can a) shine more light on UNIX and b) court Linux people in case it does "take over."
Given the choice, I would use Linux over IRIX, mainly because I can have the CDE in Linux too and because Linux has a broad base of free programs available (plus I like open source software). But if I were seriously considering building a supercomputer, and I had the choice between Linux and IRIX? I'd be stupid to choose Linux. Full stop.
SGI has been testing the waters the past two years, and now they've found their bearings. They are, indeed, fully behind their systems--100%.
This is not exclusive of SGI, either. Sun, Oracle, Novell, Corel . . . all of them have undergone serious reevaluations. SGI seems the most progressive of the bunch.
The platform is changing. GNU/Linux/Open source software offers SO MUCH MORE that they'd be idiots if they didn't embrace it. They are way ahead of the game now, and they can demonstrate it with IA64 superlinuxclusters. Check out the TOP500, and you'll see SGI has a commanding position. With this move, they'll remain there. Note the three or more "custom built" supercomputers--SGI will mask the growth of this linux category in the future.
The IRIX/Linux holy war is, for the most part, nonexistent, because their features are being merged. That is the nature of open development: cross-pollination.
The future of linux and unix is a landscape quite unlike today's . . . do you see it?
BTW--one can only purchase so many SGIs a year. After this shift stabilizes, I'll take any box(en) I can get my hands on.
BERT is not ment to replace a good programmer. It is intended to help a good programmer. While BERT does do as much automatic processing as possible, it's design allows the user to direct BERT during a highly interactive conversion process. Indeed, BERT optimizes parameters that are almost impossible for "humans" to do in their head (at least in any resonable amount of time).
I could go on ... but, I am on the floor of SC99 demostrating BERT!
Doug Eadline
Xtreme Machines
I've been following SGI company policy, SGI bashing, SGI this an SGI that for a while now, because I think they make some pretty good stuff and us likes 'real toys'.
And I think that the single most intersting piece of news on www.sgi.com of the past weeks is that they've closed a distribution deal with Ingram Micro to sell their NT machines. (Which by the way wasn;t completely insane... I think they just decided that the dearth of IRIX apps in low-end pricing was going to hurt them terribly. People that have money to buy machines buy them for 2 reasons. 1. they're cheap 2. they run apps that gets the job done - by hook or by crook. SGI was moving to a point where neither held true for them in the workstation business - or so they thought... Don;t forget that the descision to build them would of been taken some time before they came out with the machines, say 1995?? well NT vs. Linux was a different proposition for businesses back then.)
We all know that SGI rules at the high-end. and while they could do X better and Y smarter, on the whole they've got that pretty well sewn up.
The problem as it seems to me is that the 'volume' high-end _market_ is getting smaller or staying where it is, and the low-end market is moving into the mid-end. You may not like them, you may think that PC style architectures are crude, but you can't deny that you can do mid-level work on them at a price point that is scary. A PII/450Mhz with 256Mb RAM lets you do some pretty hefty work. for what?? 750 dollars, a 1000 dollars?? OK so you want a real keyboard and a real monitor - 1750 dollars. Those are joke money numbers.
The fact is that given where SGI comes from business wise, it would seem logical to assume that it hasn;t got the kind of infrastructure that allows for DELL style agressive logistics at its production facilities. When you're used to eating cake and living the highlife, how do you suddenly compete with the oridinary masses. So either you starve or you find new _business_ models. Which is what the Ingram Micro deal looks like.
Ingram is a distributor. It's core business is moving & selling stuff. So its logistics are up to dealing with an insanely cutthroat environment. Let us design the stuff and them can sell it. Clever business by SGI. Let us help nVidia design new-low end gfx cards, they can build and sell them. clever business. Let us realize that linux has a great deal to offer us in developer buzz, in ideas in 'manpower' in a whole bunch of ways. clever business.
All in all I'd be pretty surprised if SGI went down the tube.
What they should do in my opinion, is to figure a way of reaching out to 1st time, new user linuxers that need to 'run a server of some sort'. An SGI branded $49.95 linux distribution - with servicing contracts that range from basic to the-sky-is-the-limit ones. what an opportunity. There you are, sitting on a mountain of expertise in 'UNIX solutions' an overheating market of Linux wannabe companies, and along comes SGI and says: 'Look you can get SGI servicing, at a reasonable price levels, Now.'... Anybody at SGI want to offer me a management position ;-)
And now for something else, could someone please explain how HP ever managed to sell a single HP/UX workstation?? They're horrible...
bercovic@swi.psy.uva.nl