why is everyone griping about how much macs cost? is it because intel hardware has become so commoditized (and therefore cheap)? sorry, i don't think $1600 is that bad for a base G4.
I also don't see what the big deal about another bsd variant running on x86 (ie, darwin on intel). if you want bsd, get openbsd, netbsd, freebsd, bsdlite, bsd 4.4, or whatever.
OS X might give apple something that the MacOS has had some difficulties with in the past - stability.
Then again, MS based NT on a modified VMS architecture (to improve stability), and look at it (sorry nt administrators, but uptimes of a week (or month) are not impressive and in fact indicate that something is seriously wrong).
anyway, wandering far and wide of the topic, i see.... argh.
GPL is kind of an 'all or nothing' license - the BSD license is much more liberal, which is no doubt why the article mentions debian and gnu as a potential problem, but doesn't say anything about freebsd and the bsd license.
are there transmeta computing devices to buy? I haven't seen any.
i'd love to have a couple of lightweights that I could string around the house. casual internet/application access, mp3 access, etc. if there are transmeta-powered commercial devices, i'd like to know where i can buy one!
Katz can go back and redo the piece comparing the Shadowrun rpg and reality - monsters (and by extension, magic) will coexist with corporatism in the future!!
my experience with samba has been that disk i/o is more important than cpu horsepower.
Probably the biggest single factor that will contribute to slow performance is going to be disk I/O and latency, esp. if you're going to have a lot of continuous small file operations.
I'd suggest that you get a single processor, and spend money on a good ultra 2 scsi controller. If you need data protection, run RAID 10 - it's more expensive to implement than RAID 5, but it's faster, and you wouldn't need a fancy shmancy RAID controller with an intelligent cache to keep from suffering a performance hit on writes. Ugh, call me a SCSI nazi, but i wouldn't use ATA for something more than casual use.
I didn't see mention made of how many clients you're expecting to service, but a P3 or Athlon in the 700MHz range should do pretty well. couple that with lots of RAM (1GB) and tune samba accordingly (bigger buffers = faster access). of course, faster network access would remove one more bottleneck.
Man...this bullshit that metallica (more specifically, lars) is spewing is more than I can handle.
I seem to remember metallica had quite the counterculture mentality back in the pre-bob-rock days; you know, days when metallica was only played on college radio stations (88.7 KSPC rocked!) and from home stereo systems. now, i guess since they're (to steal a line from Cypress Hill) Big Rock Superstars, they don't need fans; at least, those of us who've been buying their albums (and rebuying them when they're 'borrowed', etc) since before radio airplay and mainstream acceptance made them so big.
i'm giving away all of my metallica shit, and i won't be buying any more. i got no use for a band that has no use for me.
I agree completely. I get paid a decent salary, but have to be on call 24 hours per day, seven days per week. I frequently come in an hour or so early, and always leave.5 hour late. Sometimes I take lunch, most often I eat at my workstation. I drive generally 1.5 to 2 hours each way (leave around 0530, home around 1930). Occasionally I have to check on "things" from home via Internet (or drive in). I'm always thinking about ways to do things at work, while not at work.
I liked it better when I was hourly, and was compensated when I worked my @$$ off.
I'm reminded of a scene in Metropolis, when the workers are trudging into their high-rises, head down, to start their work day (dark outside still, too)... feels very familiar to me.
Technology hasn't improved the productivity of work, it's simply made the workers more accessible, and increased the demands made upon us.
I loved working new year's eve, to validate and re-validate my backups, "just in case", and then power off my RS6000 servers, again, just in case (though I'd already lived through the roll-over six months ago in validation testing). working the 1200-2000 shift was a great way to spend a company holiday ; i mean, what the fuck, i just wanted to sit around with my wife and kids...
I loved coming in the next day at 0300 to restart my RS6000s, and then keep an eye on things "just in case". Once again, I'd already lived through this six months previously in validation. Someone is convinced somewhere in the convoluted management chain way above my head that my machines know the difference between 01-01-2000 when it happens on june 24, 1999, and when it happens 'for real'...
i know we're all in a thankless industry, and i really feel bad for people who weren't offered some sort of compensation for having to work (though, truth to tell, does money really make up for anything?) - my company offered some compensation (though behind it were very thinly-veiled threats about what would happen if you chose not to come in).
between the commute, the moron non-technical people telling me what i can and cannot do to my servers ('scuse me, i thought >iadministrator), too many missed hours of homelife, and this past weekend, i've had enough.
time for a career change - maybe i'll go south and raise alpacas in south america...
Um, the spec looks pretty good, but maybe you might want to consider: SSA over SCSI - IBM makes a good controller, there's linux support, and SSA is a good performer (drives are in a loop that can be accessed from two 'directions') - we use SSA where I work to host some decent-sized (18GB) DB2 database, and it's much faster than the scsi we were using (ultra 2 wide). it may also be more cost-effective to use a general-purpose cluster of lower performance machines to provide the computing horsepower you need. we use mosix, and it works pretty good for most things (not for everything, though). http://www.cnds.jhu.edu/mirrors/mosix/ hth
Slashdot Mirror
imagine a beowulf cluster of those!
I also don't see what the big deal about another bsd variant running on x86 (ie, darwin on intel). if you want bsd, get openbsd, netbsd, freebsd, bsdlite, bsd 4.4, or whatever.
OS X might give apple something that the MacOS has had some difficulties with in the past - stability.
Then again, MS based NT on a modified VMS architecture (to improve stability), and look at it (sorry nt administrators, but uptimes of a week (or month) are not impressive and in fact indicate that something is seriously wrong).
anyway, wandering far and wide of the topic, i see.... argh.
GPL is kind of an 'all or nothing' license - the BSD license is much more liberal, which is no doubt why the article mentions debian and gnu as a potential problem, but doesn't say anything about freebsd and the bsd license.
i'd love to have a couple of lightweights that I could string around the house. casual internet/application access, mp3 access, etc. if there are transmeta-powered commercial devices, i'd like to know where i can buy one!
Katz can go back and redo the piece comparing the Shadowrun rpg and reality - monsters (and by extension, magic) will coexist with corporatism in the future!!
I love the kludges that people come up with to make a product do something it was never designed to do.
gawd, i love the smell of napalm in morning... ...smells like, victory!
Probably the biggest single factor that will contribute to slow performance is going to be disk I/O and latency, esp. if you're going to have a lot of continuous small file operations.
I'd suggest that you get a single processor, and spend money on a good ultra 2 scsi controller. If you need data protection, run RAID 10 - it's more expensive to implement than RAID 5, but it's faster, and you wouldn't need a fancy shmancy RAID controller with an intelligent cache to keep from suffering a performance hit on writes. Ugh, call me a SCSI nazi, but i wouldn't use ATA for something more than casual use.
I didn't see mention made of how many clients you're expecting to service, but a P3 or Athlon in the 700MHz range should do pretty well. couple that with lots of RAM (1GB) and tune samba accordingly (bigger buffers = faster access). of course, faster network access would remove one more bottleneck.
I seem to remember metallica had quite the counterculture mentality back in the pre-bob-rock days; you know, days when metallica was only played on college radio stations (88.7 KSPC rocked!) and from home stereo systems. now, i guess since they're (to steal a line from Cypress Hill) Big Rock Superstars, they don't need fans; at least, those of us who've been buying their albums (and rebuying them when they're 'borrowed', etc) since before radio airplay and mainstream acceptance made them so big.
i'm giving away all of my metallica shit, and i won't be buying any more. i got no use for a band that has no use for me.
I liked it better when I was hourly, and was compensated when I worked my @$$ off.
I'm reminded of a scene in Metropolis, when the workers are trudging into their high-rises, head down, to start their work day (dark outside still, too)... feels very familiar to me.
Technology hasn't improved the productivity of work, it's simply made the workers more accessible, and increased the demands made upon us.
I loved working new year's eve, to validate and re-validate my backups, "just in case", and then power off my RS6000 servers, again, just in case (though I'd already lived through the roll-over six months ago in validation testing).
working the 1200-2000 shift was a great way to spend a company holiday ; i mean, what the fuck, i just wanted to sit around with my wife and kids...
I loved coming in the next day at 0300 to restart my RS6000s, and then keep an eye on things "just in case". Once again, I'd already lived through this six months previously in validation.
Someone is convinced somewhere in the convoluted management chain way above my head that my machines know the difference between 01-01-2000 when it happens on june 24, 1999, and when it happens 'for real'...
i know we're all in a thankless industry, and i really feel bad for people who weren't offered some sort of compensation for having to work (though, truth to tell, does money really make up for anything?) - my company offered some compensation (though behind it were very thinly-veiled threats about what would happen if you chose not to come in).
between the commute, the moron non-technical people telling me what i can and cannot do to my servers ('scuse me, i thought >iadministrator), too many missed hours of homelife, and this past weekend, i've had enough.
time for a career change - maybe i'll go south and raise alpacas in south america...
Um, the spec looks pretty good, but maybe you might want to consider: SSA over SCSI - IBM makes a good controller, there's linux support, and SSA is a good performer (drives are in a loop that can be accessed from two 'directions') - we use SSA where I work to host some decent-sized (18GB) DB2 database, and it's much faster than the scsi we were using (ultra 2 wide). it may also be more cost-effective to use a general-purpose cluster of lower performance machines to provide the computing horsepower you need. we use mosix, and it works pretty good for most things (not for everything, though). http://www.cnds.jhu.edu/mirrors/mosix/ hth