2) When it was supported, DEC had a free (as in beer) product called FX!32 that would *convert* your X86 binaries into Alpha binaries as the program run. The parts it hadn't converted would be emulated. The longer/more times you ran the program, the more of it would be native Alpha code.
Maybe you'd have a leg to stand on if Linux supported the enterprise features that Digital UNIX does.
Unfortunately, it doesn't.
Example: High performance, dynamically resizable, journalling filesystem.
Does Linux have it? No. I'm familiar with the efforts that exist to address this, I work with one of the authors of a major project for this. He'll admit that ext3/reiserfs doesn't touch ADVFS.
Example: Advanced high availability clustering solution with a shared filesystem among nodes, cluster aliasing, and context-dependant symlinks for a SINGLE disk image shared amoung up to 8 cluster nodes.
Does Linux have it? No. Be aware that Beowulf is NOT an HA solution - it's a distributed computing cluster.
Perhaps you should do some more research before blindly bashing an OS that has features that Linux has yet to dream of.
As a side note, the Alpha isn't only used for supercomputing. I'm part of a group that runs 3 clusters of AlphaServers for everything from mail, web, and database serving. Only recently did DEC/Compaq enter into the supercomputer arena with the ``SC'' series of Alphaserver.
Your typical DS/ES/GS series AlphaServer may not be meant for your average joe-blow computer enthusiast, but 14 processors does not constitute a supercomputer. The new ``SC'' series AlphaServer that DEC recently released is a 64-512 Alpha CPU model. THAT is a supercomputer.
I've been using Linux since 1995, and Digital UNIX since 1996, so I've got a pretty good feeling on the comparisons between them.
-Jeff
Moderate this down as flame bait if you like - but I have a feeling that most readers have never used Digital UNIX/Tru64, and don't have enough knowledge of it to form a good opinion.
.... Unless, of course, they're a big enough company to have a "spin" put on it.
Doing something like that would be fairly easy to spin into something good.. X company today decided to extend the widely available Y software. Joe Schmoe of X said in a press release, "We think that our product is a real value-add that will make customers out there choose our product".
To a pirate who can potentially make hundreds of thousands per movie (figure pulled out of my ass), the investment in the digital projection system isn't unheard of. The hardware they use now to duplicate films isn't cheap - nor is the film they use to duplicate it on.
Pirates could also hire engineers to take a look at the projection system, and reverse engineer it.
Sure, it's an entirely different scale than cracking your DVD player, but it's still possible. After all, cracking a brand-new movie when it hits the theatres is an entirely different scale than cracking your DVD that has been through the theatres, and off-screen for a few months before it gets to your home system.
I don't really see how either of your examples are relevant.
Wine - Runs windows apps *on* a Unix-based system. The fact that they can be displayed remotely is inherited from the fact that they're using X to implement it.
VMWare - Runs windows apps *on* windows using a virtual machine *on* a UNIX-based system. Again - they gain the remote display capability because they're using X.
VNC - Throws the entire desktop around.
Personally - This is almost what I'm looking for in a Windows remote administration package.
What I'd LIKE to have is a single copy of a Windows application running, and be able to have multiple sessions to it. Applications run on the windows "desktop" as usual, but you can hook into them via a remote admin package. I don't want the whole desktop - just the app. The application would never know the difference - almost like carbon copy, but without the entire desktop.
Best of all, I wouldn't need to go a co-worker's office to use their Windows box with Carbon Copy!
Main Entry: 1cache Pronunciation: 'kash Function: noun Etymology: French, from cacher to press, hide, from (assumed) Vulgar Latin coacticare to press together, from Latin coactare to compel, frequentative of cogere to compel -- more at COGENT Date: 1797 1 a : a hiding place especially for concealing and preserving provisions or implements b : a secure place of storage 2 : something hidden or stored in a cache 3 : a computer memory with very short access time used for storage of frequently used instructions or data -- called also cache memory
I think that if readers have an opinion against JP - it should be expressed.
The problem with the "if you don't have anything nice to say" philosophy is that if all anyone says are nice things - then the truth may never get heard.
In many Commercial UNIX systems, the proc filesystem isn't as broad as that of linux and the low-level tuning parameters are configured using the Kernel debugger. In some cases, the kernel debugger is the general program debugger with the ability to traverse/dev/kmem - and some functions to manipulate the appropriate data structures.
MySQL may be great for larger databases - but what happens if they're getting written to contstantly?
As far as I know, MySQL only supports table locking, rather than the row locking of Oracle (and perhaps Postgres). We started using database logging for our Apache server, so that we don't eat so much CPU running analog - Statistics would just be SQL calls to the database.
We started with MySQL and ended up postponing the project - MySQL just couldn't keep up. The hardware isn't the problem, it was a DS/20 w/ 1 GB of RAM, running Digital UNIX 4.0F.
Since we have other projects, this one has been on hold for some time, waiting for one of us to port our logger to Oracle.
Just thought I'd mention my experiences with it. I'm not knocking MySQL - We still use it for a decent number of mostly reader databases, but for intensive writers - no way.
Disclaimer: I'm not a DBA, nor do I pretend to be. If anyone has information that contradicts this, it's entirely possible that I'm wrong.
Case in point: Windows is *still* the #1 selling OS, does that make it better?
The fact of the matter is that Linux *still* isn't mature enough for the Data Center. I know there are support contracts available, and I'm aware that some businesses have been moving to Linux in their Data Centers.
I won't.
I'm part of a group that runs the Data Center for a major University. We've got over 20 Alpha Servers, ranging from older AS2000s to DS/20s, and soon - a few ES/40s.
How many of them run Linux? Zero.
I like Linux. I've been using it since early 1995. I still run it now on my home PC, and my work PC. However, I won't run it in the Data Center any time soon.
The simple fact is that Linux still lacks some major features that commercial Unices have had for years. These features are what we want. If they happen to be in a "free" OS - great. But they're not.
Using OSF/Digital UNIX/Tru64 as an example, Linux still doesn't offer:
High Availability, Production-level clustering.
Beowulf isn't HA clustering, it's processor clustering, and is absolutely useless in an HA environment
TruCluster 5, the newest version of DU Clustering software supports:
Cluster Filesystem. The filesytem is available to all cluster members using memory channel (does linux support memory channel?) cache coherency is maintained, and the filesystem appears as local to all members. While this isn't a true shared filesystem a la VMS yet, it's getting there.
Cluster Aliasing. The cluster shares an IP address, and members will redirect requests internally. Applications written to be aware of cluster aliasing can run, and be served off, all members in the cluster, simultaneously.
Shared bus. This is an older feature, but still one of the coolest. 4 cluster members and an enterprise storage array share a single ultra-wide, differential scsi bus. That's not the cool part. In addition to network connectivity, they also maintain availability by monitoring each other over the SCSI bus.
A MultiVolume, dynamically resizable, journalling filesystem
ADVFS has been shipping with DU since v4 (maybe earlier?) We love it. If we have a database that's getting too big, or if users need more space - we add a disk, and add it to the filesystem. Here's the kicker: The system doesn't come down. The filesystem isn't even unmounted.
There are more, but for the sake of briefness, these are the most important.
I know that Linux has journalling filesystems on the way. I'm quite aware of the progress of journalling in ReiserFS - the lead journalling developer has the office next to mine. (btw, the press release wasn't his idea)
Even with journalling support, Linux still doesn't support the other features we're looking for in a filesytem.
When Linux can support the features we need, we'll switch. Until then, not a chance.
We're pretty much only a DEC shop, and I can assure you, and Compaq has ceased "Digital" branding. The hardware and software has hardly any references to Digital anymore.
At any rate, I think dumping Tru64 on Merced is a good thing. We've all seen the specs posted for the 21364 (EV7), and Merced can't even touch them.
Tru64 runs great on Alphas - why ruin it with a POS processor?
The "Maya" product, as a whole, consists of multiple packages. The renderer is only one of them. In order to make a complete development package, the user needs to have "Studio aka. Power Modeler", StudioPaint, and several plugins. F/X comes standard, but plugins like Live, Cloth, and Artisan are usually added (at extra cost).
The "real" cost of Maya is somewhere in the $40,000 - $50,000 range.
The A|W offering above only has the renderer, which allows Linux to assist/control a render farm, but doesn't support the animation development environment.
Using Maya as an example of Linux's multimedia capabilities is premature. Certainly, this can be used as an example of Linux's ability to handle computationally complex tasks, but that ability has been proven already.
Perhaps you failed to notice the part about this being an AMERICAN law.
There are quite a few programmers out there that AREN'T Americans, and as such, have no legal reason to follow American laws.
I'll admit that the majority of Slashdot readers are probably American (including myself), but the rest of the world doesn't have to follow these greedy laws.
Don't think I'm saying that as Americans, we can't fight this. I'm planning on writing my local congresswoman about this, but for the rest of the world - this news is nothing more than an annoyance.
What's more - maybe this will push more non-US programmers to participate in the Open Source movement.
NT only has Primary and Secondary domain controllers if configured to act in such a configuration. Ever heard of Kerberos? DCE? Maybe you should look them up, since NT is *switching* to use them in NT 5. Linux is the kernel. The surrounding applications are the distributions. Kerberos and DCE crush NT as far as security goes. Most distributions don't come with them, but both are freely available.
Only an NT user would think that a PC with modems hanging off it is an adequate way of running an ISP. Terminal servers are what most ISPs use, whether in the form of an older model with individual modems, or a 3com/USR Total Control unit that can support over *300* modems in a single chassis.
>I'm just surprised at how quickly they've managed >to get support for them into the kernel, >especially as they haven't been released yet!
>BTW, SGI are committed to linux on these boxes >internally; they just don't want to say this too >publically as M$ gave them quite a bit of money >to help advertise the new boxes and they don't >want to bite the hand that's feeding them (which >is common courtesy, IMO, even if it is M$).
The Visual Workstations, AFAIK, HAVE been released. I attended a roll-out yesterday, and I know there was one last week.
After speaking with an SGI engineer, I was told that they will be working with the Linux community on developing support for the Visual Workstations.
Now if only Alias would port their apps to Linux (possibly after a year or two, according to an independent sales rep.)
One thing though, I wouldn't really call it a PC. After seeing the presentation, I'd have to agree with SGI that it's not a PC clone. The motherboard is completely different than standard PCs, and it is basically a next-generation O2, with Intel processor(s). It's got the unified memory model that the O2s have, which makes your system memory act as memory for all the peripherals... This happens over a 3.2GB/sec bus, so there's no performance hit - I saw a 50 MB (4k x 4k x 32bit) image spun, scaled, and effects applied real-time. It's a pretty sweet little box.
Slashdot Mirror
Two things here:
1) MS stopped support for WinNT/Alpha
2) When it was supported, DEC had a free (as in beer) product called FX!32 that would *convert* your X86 binaries into Alpha binaries as the program run. The parts it hadn't converted would be emulated. The longer/more times you ran the program, the more of it would be native Alpha code.
Leave it DEC to code stuff like this.
-Jeff
``Insanely idiotic OS''??
Maybe you'd have a leg to stand on if Linux supported the enterprise features that Digital UNIX does.
Unfortunately, it doesn't.
Example: High performance, dynamically resizable, journalling filesystem.
Does Linux have it? No. I'm familiar with the efforts that exist to address this, I work with one of the authors of a major project for this. He'll admit that ext3/reiserfs doesn't touch ADVFS.
Example: Advanced high availability clustering solution with a shared filesystem among nodes, cluster aliasing, and context-dependant symlinks for a SINGLE disk image shared amoung up to 8 cluster nodes.
Does Linux have it? No. Be aware that Beowulf is NOT an HA solution - it's a distributed computing cluster.
Perhaps you should do some more research before blindly bashing an OS that has features that Linux has yet to dream of.
As a side note, the Alpha isn't only used for supercomputing. I'm part of a group that runs 3 clusters of AlphaServers for everything from mail, web, and database serving. Only recently did DEC/Compaq enter into the supercomputer arena with the ``SC'' series of Alphaserver.
Your typical DS/ES/GS series AlphaServer may not be meant for your average joe-blow computer enthusiast, but 14 processors does not constitute a supercomputer. The new ``SC'' series AlphaServer that DEC recently released is a 64-512 Alpha CPU model. THAT is a supercomputer.
I've been using Linux since 1995, and Digital UNIX since 1996, so I've got a pretty good feeling on the comparisons between them.
-Jeff
Moderate this down as flame bait if you like - but I have a feeling that most readers have never used Digital UNIX/Tru64, and don't have enough knowledge of it to form a good opinion.
.... Unless, of course, they're a big enough company to have a "spin" put on it.
Doing something like that would be fairly easy to spin into something good.. X company today decided to extend the widely available Y software. Joe Schmoe of X said in a press release, "We think that our product is a real value-add that will make customers out there choose our product".
etc, etc.
To a pirate who can potentially make hundreds of thousands per movie (figure pulled out of my ass), the investment in the digital projection system isn't unheard of. The hardware they use now to duplicate films isn't cheap - nor is the film they use to duplicate it on.
Pirates could also hire engineers to take a look at the projection system, and reverse engineer it.
Sure, it's an entirely different scale than cracking your DVD player, but it's still possible. After all, cracking a brand-new movie when it hits the theatres is an entirely different scale than cracking your DVD that has been through the theatres, and off-screen for a few months before it gets to your home system.
-Jeff
Yes - You can go higher than 1600x1200 - but I don't believe that the standard xf86config generates the ModeLines for it.
I haven't looked at the code, but it might be possible just to edge that maximum up. I'm sure all those modelines can't be hard-coded in there.
-Jeff
As far as I know, Citrix allows connectivity from Mac/Windows clients to Windows servers.
I don't think they offer a Linux/*BSD solution.
-Jeff
This patent (I only read the summary) looks like a description of The X Window System as a concept!
-Jeff
I don't really see how either of your examples are relevant.
Wine - Runs windows apps *on* a Unix-based system. The fact that they can be displayed remotely is inherited from the fact that they're using X to implement it.
VMWare - Runs windows apps *on* windows using a virtual machine *on* a UNIX-based system. Again - they gain the remote display capability because they're using X.
VNC - Throws the entire desktop around.
Personally - This is almost what I'm looking for in a Windows remote administration package.
What I'd LIKE to have is a single copy of a Windows application running, and be able to have multiple sessions to it. Applications run on the windows "desktop" as usual, but you can hook into them via a remote admin package. I don't want the whole desktop - just the app. The application would never know the difference - almost like carbon copy, but without the entire desktop.
Best of all, I wouldn't need to go a co-worker's office to use their Windows box with Carbon Copy!
-Jeff
Nah -
It's fa-sck, but try as hard as you can to make that one syllable.
-Jeff
It's French all right, but not pronounced that way.
From Mirriam-Webster:
Main Entry: 1cache
Pronunciation: 'kash
Function: noun
Etymology: French, from cacher to press, hide, from (assumed) Vulgar Latin coacticare to press together, from Latin coactare to compel, frequentative of cogere to compel -- more at COGENT
Date: 1797
1 a : a hiding place especially for concealing and preserving provisions or implements b : a secure place of storage
2 : something hidden or stored in a cache
3 : a computer memory with very short access time used for storage of frequently used instructions or data -- called also cache memory
I disagree.
I think that if readers have an opinion against JP - it should be expressed.
The problem with the "if you don't have anything nice to say" philosophy is that if all anyone says are nice things - then the truth may never get heard.
-Jeff
There is a semi recent benchmark vs ext2fs at http://name sys.botik.ru/~yura/benchmarks/journal_227/ext2_vs_ jour9.html
Chris has the office next to mine and has been showing me these benchmarks just about every day - they improve just about every day.
-Jeff
In many Commercial UNIX systems, the proc filesystem isn't as broad as that of linux and the low-level tuning parameters are configured using the Kernel debugger. In some cases, the kernel debugger is the general program debugger with the ability to traverse /dev/kmem - and some functions to manipulate the appropriate data structures.
Debuggers aren't only used for debugging.
MySQL may be great for larger databases - but what happens if they're getting written to contstantly?
As far as I know, MySQL only supports table locking, rather than the row locking of Oracle (and perhaps Postgres). We started using database logging for our Apache server, so that we don't eat so much CPU running analog - Statistics would just be SQL calls to the database.
We started with MySQL and ended up postponing the project - MySQL just couldn't keep up. The hardware isn't the problem, it was a DS/20 w/ 1 GB of RAM, running Digital UNIX 4.0F.
Since we have other projects, this one has been on hold for some time, waiting for one of us to port our logger to Oracle.
Just thought I'd mention my experiences with it. I'm not knocking MySQL - We still use it for a decent number of mostly reader databases, but for intensive writers - no way.
Disclaimer: I'm not a DBA, nor do I pretend to be. If anyone has information that contradicts this, it's entirely possible that I'm wrong.
Case in point: Windows is *still* the #1 selling OS, does that make it better?
The fact of the matter is that Linux *still* isn't mature enough for the Data Center. I know there are support contracts available, and I'm aware that some businesses have been moving to Linux in their Data Centers.
I won't.
I'm part of a group that runs the Data Center for a major University. We've got over 20 Alpha Servers, ranging from older AS2000s to DS/20s, and soon - a few ES/40s.
How many of them run Linux? Zero.
I like Linux. I've been using it since early 1995. I still run it now on my home PC, and my work PC. However, I won't run it in the Data Center any time soon.
The simple fact is that Linux still lacks some major features that commercial Unices have had for years. These features are what we want. If they happen to be in a "free" OS - great. But they're not.
Using OSF/Digital UNIX/Tru64 as an example, Linux still doesn't offer:
A MultiVolume, dynamically resizable, journalling filesystem
There are more, but for the sake of briefness, these are the most important.
I know that Linux has journalling filesystems on the way. I'm quite aware of the progress of journalling in ReiserFS - the lead journalling developer has the office next to mine. (btw, the press release wasn't his idea)
Even with journalling support, Linux still doesn't support the other features we're looking for in a filesytem.
When Linux can support the features we need, we'll switch. Until then, not a chance.
-Jeff
We're pretty much only a DEC shop, and I can assure you, and Compaq has ceased "Digital" branding. The hardware and software has hardly any references to Digital anymore.
At any rate, I think dumping Tru64 on Merced is a good thing. We've all seen the specs posted for the 21364 (EV7), and Merced can't even touch them.
Tru64 runs great on Alphas - why ruin it with a POS processor?
20 K a sec? Yech...
Western New York cable modems get 500K/sec. ;)
-Jeff
The "Maya" product, as a whole, consists of multiple packages. The renderer is only one of them. In order to make a complete development package, the user needs to have "Studio aka. Power Modeler", StudioPaint, and several plugins. F/X comes standard, but plugins like Live, Cloth, and Artisan are usually added (at extra cost).
The "real" cost of Maya is somewhere in the $40,000 - $50,000 range.
The A|W offering above only has the renderer, which allows Linux to assist/control a render farm, but doesn't support the animation development environment.
Using Maya as an example of Linux's multimedia capabilities is premature. Certainly, this can be used as an example of Linux's ability to handle computationally complex tasks, but that ability has been proven already.
-Jeff
The R12K is out now, and has been for some time. I think IRIX 6.5.3 or 6.5.4 added support for them.
:(
There are R12K upgrades for existing Octanes and Origins.
Sadly, not for my poor Indigo2s.
-Jeff
Here, rather.
For some reason the comment poster/editor doesn't like quotes in links.. And, it posted my first update as an AC..
Is something broken?
-Jeff
As a result, an updated version has been posted here.
The errors corrected are:
- Linux not being only 32-bit
- IRIX being the first 64-bit UNIX (OSF/1 was).
- The MIPS processors are R12000, R14000, R16000 not just the numerics.
-JeffPerhaps you failed to notice the part about this being an AMERICAN law.
There are quite a few programmers out there that AREN'T Americans, and as such, have no legal reason to follow American laws.
I'll admit that the majority of Slashdot readers are probably American (including myself), but the rest of the world doesn't have to follow these greedy laws.
Don't think I'm saying that as Americans, we can't fight this. I'm planning on writing my local congresswoman about this, but for the rest of the world - this news is nothing more than an annoyance.
What's more - maybe this will push more non-US programmers to participate in the Open Source movement.
-Jeff
NT only has Primary and Secondary domain controllers if configured to act in such a configuration. Ever heard of Kerberos? DCE? Maybe you should look them up, since NT is *switching* to use them in NT 5. Linux is the kernel. The surrounding applications are the distributions. Kerberos and DCE crush NT as far as security goes. Most distributions don't come with them, but both are freely available.
Only an NT user would think that a PC with modems hanging off it is an adequate way of running an ISP. Terminal servers are what most ISPs use, whether in the form of an older model with individual modems, or a 3com/USR Total Control unit that can support over *300* modems in a single chassis.
>I'm just surprised at how quickly they've managed >to get support for them into the kernel, >especially as they haven't been released yet!
>BTW, SGI are committed to linux on these boxes >internally; they just don't want to say this too >publically as M$ gave them quite a bit of money >to help advertise the new boxes and they don't >want to bite the hand that's feeding them (which >is common courtesy, IMO, even if it is M$).
The Visual Workstations, AFAIK, HAVE been released. I attended a roll-out yesterday, and I know there was one last week.
After speaking with an SGI engineer, I was told that they will be working with the Linux community on developing support for the Visual Workstations.
Now if only Alias would port their apps to Linux (possibly after a year or two, according to an independent sales rep.)
One thing though, I wouldn't really call it a PC. After seeing the presentation, I'd have to agree with SGI that it's not a PC clone. The motherboard is completely different than standard PCs, and it is basically a next-generation O2, with Intel processor(s). It's got the unified memory model that the O2s have, which makes your system memory act as memory for all the peripherals... This happens over a 3.2GB/sec bus, so there's no performance hit - I saw a 50 MB (4k x 4k x 32bit) image spun, scaled, and effects applied real-time. It's a pretty sweet little box.
-Jeff