Well, buy that logic, we should all use Red Hat, because they have the biggest market share, and it's easier for ISV's to port to a single distribution, reguardless of the platforms technical merits or problems.
I am just trying to point out that popularity some times flies in the face of logic. If we have to go with Linux, then, the LSB will be more important than ever... And, along those lines, it would mean that the LSB would be more important than standards getting in the way of development of Linux itself, because without standards, someone like Red Hat could end up being the only Linux that VAR/ISV's want anything to do with.
So, that's 95, and I just tested something, I can easily set a 10 character password, so... 10^95 potential password possabilities, assuming you stay under 10 characters.
Hmmm.... I just decided to change all my passwords to a really long string!
I don't think that is accurate... I think you can use the symbols too now, like !@#$%^&*() in your passwords, so that's another ten at least. So, maybe fingerd won't matter much if the password is creative enough.
Sure it is... if you have the money and the time, there isn't anything you can't buy for yourself and consider a "toy."
You make it sound like he is messing around with an atomic bomb or a machine gun or something... and if he isn't careful he could kill someone. I don't think someone buying Oracle and installing it is nearly that dangerous.:-) Or, is it;-)
Heh.. Port and ports. I mean a commercial binary of Oracle avaliable for FreeBSD when I mention a "direct port to FreeBSD," not to be confuzed with the FreeBSD ported software that can be compiled from "/usr/ports" (and also not to be confuzed with the type of port, like 80, that everyone is trying to telnet to for the crack.linuxppc.org thing).
I hate to be "One of those FreeBSD nuts" but... I am running both Linux and FreeBSD lately (in addition to using some other commercial UNIX systems that will remain nameless), and I have really found that due to memory management, I much prefer FreeBSD for servers (well, that and the ease of remote administration using ports, giving the advantage of fast downloads without hunting, and compileing software optimized completely to my hardware with the right/etc/make.conf flags).
Now, on workstations, I am still using Linux, because of the better avaliability of software. But, for something like Oracle, I would prefer a direct port to FreeBSD if I were to ever use it. Because of the fact that Oracle has the potential to use a lot of memory, FreeBSD may have an edge in better memory management (always lower memory usage, IMHO it does a more efficent job freeing up used memory while caching the important stuff).
Someone please moderate this FreeBSD post down, it's not suppose to be here, a simple "Off Topic" would do if a few of you have points to spare. I am just going to try to repost the stuff again in the other thread.
Uh, I submitted this to the previous discussion, I am sure of it. How the heck did it end up here, I am luck I found it. Anyone able to switch the storyID it's attached to and move it over to the previous discussion?
I hate to be "One of those FreeBSD nuts" but... I am running both Linux and FreeBSD lately (in addition to using some other commercial UNIX systems that will remain nameless), and I have really found that due to memory management, I much prefer FreeBSD for servers (well, that and the ease of remote administration using ports, giving the advantage of fast downloads without hunting, and compileing software optimized completely to my hardware with the right/etc/make.conf flags).
Now, on workstations, I am still using Linux, because of the better avaliability of software. But, for something like Oracle, I would prefer a direct port to FreeBSD if I were to ever use it. Because of the fact that Oracle has the potential to use a lot of memory, FreeBSD may have an edge in better memory management (always lower memory usage, IMHO it does a more efficent job freeing up used memory while caching the important stuff).
The second they turn on fingerd (which they might if all other cracking attempts fail), someone can grab some usernames. At that point, there is hope at something like this, but not until then. But even still, if you assume a 7 charcter password that is all lower case text (24 possable characters), ther is still something like 200,000,000,000,000,000,000 possable combinations for passwords, isn't there? (what is the statistical calculation here, I forget, 7^24? or 24^7 or something, which would still be 4,500,000,000 combinations...)
I should dig out my statistics book, and count up how many usable characters there are for passwords... Then maybe time a login attempt from a fast connection... Hmm. Well, as long on the up side, I suppose you could run a mulitple attempts to login at once and cut the time needed down drastically. Anyone actually know what the right calculation is, and what the results are for number of possable passwords and potential time required is?
Oh, I don't work on coldfire. check out mu.current.nu if you think those links are cool. It's sorta slashdot like, but focused on this kind of news specificly...
ZDNET story Register Article Clip 1 from yesterday at mu.current.nu: Motorola Computer Group is going to be at the Linux Expo August 9-12 in San Jose, CA, to talk about using Motorola hardware for embedded Linux solutions. Related Clip from Sunday on mu.current.nu: The PPTP Server is out, brought to you by Moreton Bay. If you don't remember who they are, maybe I can remind you, in February we released the first Linux port to the Motorola Coldfire family of processors. The nice thing to note, is that coldfire hardware can be had from Motorola Digital DNA at a fairly reasonable price.
Ok, those are reasonable answers, I don't doubt them to much, even though I usually have a very tough time believing anything that comes from a guy with "Marketing" in his job description (joking):-)
But since your here, and answering questions, how about these.. Why did VA buy out Mandrakes company then, thier mostly GUI related. And have you hired Raster yet? Something is in the GUI pipeline there, it's not that easy to hide who you hire and who you talk to;-)
And, any ETA on the AMD systems or return to other distributions? Even a wild guess? 1 year too long before the groth settles? 6 months? 2 years?
And... I really would LOVE to see someone with VA's quality enter the FreeBSD market, anyone at VA Linux Systems considered a "VA FreeBSD Systems" branch?
Ok, I'm done for now. Don't wanna press ya, never meant to make VA look bad. I just have questions about the company from a "potential IPO" standpoint. As far as what company I would recommend for someone looking for a quality Linux box, VA is _THE_ top of my list. But when I see "IPO" pop up, and then the topic of the story changes within the first few minutes, the type of questions I have completely change... But... That's buisness.
I use to think VAResearch was "the thing" that would make Linux be taken seriously. Well, I don't know anymore.
Now, I have no questions about thier quality, knowledge, and service. It's my understanding that VA Res^H^H^HLinux Systems is one of the best in these areas.
What strikes me as odd, is the staff, and the push for "talent." Maybe I am wrong here, but for about 4 months now (at least) it was looking like VARe^H^HLinux Systems was after every and any "Big Name" in the Linux community. It seemed that there wasn't a "plan" because they were all over the map, GUI people, drivers people, etc...
Then, the plan comes to light. Get big names, get attention, get more money, get more backing, get more big name people, get more backing, get more money.... Uh. Well, that's what I see right now anyway. I hope I am wrong.
Now don't get me wrong, VA Linux Systems and it's "partner" companies that it now owns would be a great place to work. And, I can't think of more knowledgeable people to work with than the people VA employees. And, _IF_ they are just hiring talent, and allowing these great coders to just "do thier thing" and write for Linux, that's really cool. But, it just seems a little "lurky" to me. I'd just like to see some clear information out there... For Example:
VA Linux OS Version 6.0 Kit Now, what the heck is this? No more does VA give you a choice of OS's, they made thier own. Well, good, maybe, bad maybe... Considering the talent that is there, this could mean that they have a custom kernel for each system (duals, quads, etc), a nice professional GUI and administration package from thier GUI team, and drivers that are rock solid from the drivers guys on staff. And with all this, you know the staff will be there to "help you out" by getting you the right binary packages, optimized for you system, avaliable on thier FTP sites, orginized just for your system, ready at each software update... Waahoo... Corporate No Brainer Linux Solution. But... I don't think I see that happening, VA's FTP site is REALLY LACKING considering the staff they have there, and they don't say anything about this new "VA Linux OS" package, and I have even emailed them to ask what it's based on (Red Hat I suspect), if anything at all, and they never even wrote me back..
So, Although I see some good there, I still see a lot of spending, and not a lot of "value" that will draw more consumers. So, I don't think I would be standing in line to get at the IPO. At least not with what I know now.
Oh, and the Intel thing... Hard to have a low end system when Intel is your major financial backer. Ever wonder why they don't have any systems for under $2,000 and no systems with AMD processors?
Re:GUI competition is great.
on
Some KDE news
·
· Score: 2
There is more GUI competition within Linux than the rest of the computing world put together.
Correction, you mean UNIX, not LINUX!
Linux is not the only OS that can run KDE, Gnome, etc... Don't count my IRIX and FreeBSD boxes out yet, I am quite happy with them, and have no intention of converting them to Linux.
Yea, my spelling is really bad, bad enought that when I do anything important at all, I spell check twice, reread it twice, and get someone to read it over if I can. Luckily, slashdot posts don't rank that high on my "critically impoartant spelling chek lyst.";-)
Heh, They mispelled your name twice;-) Once in the title, and once in the brief...:-) Stuff Happens... (Suprizing how often, I got a written job offer for a place I interviewed at a week ago, and couldn't accept it because it was a contract that had my name spelled wrong all over it).
Heh.. Somone was typing just a little to fast, and doesn't realize the spelling checker doesn't do names...
If we are going to make strong encryption easily availible to everyone, we need to fight the battle as intelligent people, not as a bunch of cultish raving lunatics.
You all are way too deep into this "Spy" buisness.... Step back and look at the big picture.
Someone needs to form the "General Public For Computer Privacy" campain or something. Seriously, the word needs to get out, and to the general public, in simple words, without code and jargon, asap.
If your mom could hit a button on her mail client that wraped up her email so that only her sister Betty could read it, she probably would... That's the goal of encription, even though it's not at a fully functional GUI level yet (and partly due to regulations).
Now, tell all those people what encription really means... Tell them that any nosy 16 year old with a part time job at an ISP can probably read all thier email at will. Tell them that encription is about privacy, not about computer hackers in dark rooms braking into the CIA. Your not going to be able to keep encription until the general public understands what it really is.
What are the legal implications? Does this mean that I can't email my friend in Denver if I use pgp in the future if the government has it's way? If that is the legal case, then, it could easily be made a legal case that I can't send him a letter in a sealed envlope with a stamp on it, because no one can "snoop" in the mail easily.
The PEOPLE need to know, so someone needs to tell them. Janet Reno can get on CNN and tell the world that she is makeing it a safer place. Unless someone else can stand up, orginize, and get press coverage, they will believe it. If this was a matter of "makeing the world a safer place" and she proposed allowing open inspection of anyones house without a search warrent, don't you think there would be a few people who could easily understand it and explain the implications to those who don't?
The REAL problem is, we are all just preaching to the choir here... Everyone agrees that we would like to be able to at least ATTEMPT to have a little privacy... But, can you really explain it in terms that your parents, your ministers, your school teachers, and your children can understand? That's where the effort should be focused.
The bus connecting the memory controller and RAM moves data to and from main memory at an astounding 3.2GB per second-six times faster than an AGP 2X graphics bus.-- This would be very good for a server as well.
Combining the most advanced graphics engine available for Windows NT, unheard-of memory bandwidth, and a multiprocessor interface, the memory controller ensures that your most critical data is on the shortest possible path.The tightly coupled Cobalt graphics engine performs lightning- fast 3D geometry, sophisticated shading, lighting, hardware-accelerated texturing, and pixel fill.-- Clearly, they are selling the advantages of thier chipset as "better video preformance." But, when you increas memory I/O rates, and general communication bandwidth in a system, that's going to help out a lot for servers too. Intel Pentium III Xeon Processors Up to four Intel Pentium III Xeon microprocessors provide the pinnacle of Intel processor performance. Your Silicon Graphics 540 workstation features the fastest Intel Pentium III Xeon processors available, with performance-enhancing features such as a dual independent (cache and system) bus TM architecture, dynamic execution, Intel MMX multimedia technology, and a closely coupled Level 2 cache bus running at the full speed of the processor, with cache capacities up to 2MB. -- Clearly, they have a 4 CPU Intel Xeon system, called the "Visual Workstation" that comes very clsoe to thier new Linux/Intel Server claims.
This is all why I suspect that it's the same. Now, there are some features that the Cobalt chipset gives them that will help a server, and it's a lot of work to develop a chipset for a system at this level, so I doubt they will be using something diffrent for the new "server." But at the same time, there are a lot of video and audio subsystems in the Visual Workstation that they could probably remove. And, the focus could be shifted to network capability and away from Video.
So, I guess, after review, the real questions are:
Will they use the Cobalt Chipset?
Will they use the same Motherboards?
Will this simply be "adding a drive sled bay" to a visual workstation?
Will they be cutting back on the Video and Audio abilities?
Why does the price mentioned seem higer than the Visual Workstation (if you just adding a sled, but taking out all the video and audio stuff?)?
So, coming back at this, I have to think your right, it's a diffrent box, because if they claim "hot swap" they probably have sleds for it. (SGI sleds are WAY to expensive BTW). And, given that one significant differance will probably be in the case, it makes me wonder what the other differances will be... because there may well be many, this might be totally new box, and I sure wish I knew what the specs really were.
Uh, it's an SGI box, with Intel CPU's... The only one I know of that they now manufacture is the "Visual Workstation."
I would need to see some significant proof to believe that this hardware is substantually diffrent than the existing Visual Workstation they sell running Windows NT.
No one has mentioned that they have built a totally new hardware configuration, based on Intel CPU's. Therefore, it's only reasonable to conclude that they are mearly installing Linux on the Visual Workstations, and calling it a "server."
The differance between a server and a workstation is in the eyes of the beholder. If you think just calling it "server" makes it diffrent, I would have to point to the countless users who run httpd, ftpd, nfsd, etc on thier "workstations." But, to me, it's neither, it's just a piece of hardware. What they do with that hardware doesn't change the fact that I believe that the hardware is the same.
So, even if it's the same as a Visual Workstation (which is just a "product name," and doesn't automagically make the product incapable of acting as a server), but even if they took that box, and yanked the video card out, it's still the same hardware, and Linux is know to run on it, and X doesn't run on it yet, so, I just don't see anything new here.
Slashdot Mirror
I am just trying to point out that popularity some times flies in the face of logic. If we have to go with Linux, then, the LSB will be more important than ever... And, along those lines, it would mean that the LSB would be more important than standards getting in the way of development of Linux itself, because without standards, someone like Red Hat could end up being the only Linux that VAR/ISV's want anything to do with.
Hmm that sounds more realistic, 5.19E19... Still would take a while to brute force it, even with a username.
rob@water:~/ $ wc file.txt
1 1 95 file.txt
rob@water:~/ $ more file.txt
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTU
So, that's 95, and I just tested something, I can easily set a 10 character password, so... 10^95 potential password possabilities, assuming you stay under 10 characters.
Hmmm.... I just decided to change all my passwords to a really long string!
I don't think that is accurate... I think you can use the symbols too now, like !@#$%^&*() in your passwords, so that's another ten at least. So, maybe fingerd won't matter much if the password is creative enough.
Sure it is... if you have the money and the time, there isn't anything you can't buy for yourself and consider a "toy."
You make it sound like he is messing around with an atomic bomb or a machine gun or something... and if he isn't careful he could kill someone. I don't think someone buying Oracle and installing it is nearly that dangerous. :-) Or, is it ;-)
Heh.. Port and ports. I mean a commercial binary of Oracle avaliable for FreeBSD when I mention a "direct port to FreeBSD," not to be confuzed with the FreeBSD ported software that can be compiled from "/usr/ports" (and also not to be confuzed with the type of port, like 80, that everyone is trying to telnet to for the crack.linuxppc.org thing).
Now, on workstations, I am still using Linux, because of the better avaliability of software. But, for something like Oracle, I would prefer a direct port to FreeBSD if I were to ever use it. Because of the fact that Oracle has the potential to use a lot of memory, FreeBSD may have an edge in better memory management (always lower memory usage, IMHO it does a more efficent job freeing up used memory while caching the important stuff).
Someone please moderate this FreeBSD post down, it's not suppose to be here, a simple "Off Topic" would do if a few of you have points to spare. I am just going to try to repost the stuff again in the other thread.
Uh, I submitted this to the previous discussion, I am sure of it. How the heck did it end up here, I am luck I found it. Anyone able to switch the storyID it's attached to and move it over to the previous discussion?
Now, on workstations, I am still using Linux, because of the better avaliability of software. But, for something like Oracle, I would prefer a direct port to FreeBSD if I were to ever use it. Because of the fact that Oracle has the potential to use a lot of memory, FreeBSD may have an edge in better memory management (always lower memory usage, IMHO it does a more efficent job freeing up used memory while caching the important stuff).
Actually, there are upper, and lower case characters, and numbers, and symbols, so, there are definately over 50, maybe somewhere around 75?
I should dig out my statistics book, and count up how many usable characters there are for passwords... Then maybe time a login attempt from a fast connection... Hmm. Well, as long on the up side, I suppose you could run a mulitple attempts to login at once and cut the time needed down drastically. Anyone actually know what the right calculation is, and what the results are for number of possable passwords and potential time required is?
I think it's not removing the old ones when it updates the user preferances with the new ones... :-/
Oh, I don't work on coldfire. check out mu.current.nu if you think those links are cool. It's sorta slashdot like, but focused on this kind of news specificly...
ZDNET story
Register Article
Clip 1 from yesterday at mu.current.nu:
Motorola Computer Group is going to be at the Linux Expo August 9-12 in San Jose, CA, to talk about using Motorola hardware for embedded Linux solutions.
Related Clip from Sunday on mu.current.nu: The PPTP Server is out, brought to you by Moreton Bay. If you don't remember who they are, maybe I can remind you, in February we released the first Linux port to the Motorola Coldfire family of processors. The nice thing to note, is that coldfire hardware can be had from Motorola Digital DNA at a fairly reasonable price.
But since your here, and answering questions, how about these.. Why did VA buy out Mandrakes company then, thier mostly GUI related. And have you hired Raster yet? Something is in the GUI pipeline there, it's not that easy to hide who you hire and who you talk to ;-)
And, any ETA on the AMD systems or return to other distributions? Even a wild guess? 1 year too long before the groth settles? 6 months? 2 years?
And... I really would LOVE to see someone with VA's quality enter the FreeBSD market, anyone at VA Linux Systems considered a "VA FreeBSD Systems" branch?
Ok, I'm done for now. Don't wanna press ya, never meant to make VA look bad. I just have questions about the company from a "potential IPO" standpoint. As far as what company I would recommend for someone looking for a quality Linux box, VA is _THE_ top of my list. But when I see "IPO" pop up, and then the topic of the story changes within the first few minutes, the type of questions I have completely change... But... That's buisness.
Now, I have no questions about thier quality, knowledge, and service. It's my understanding that VA Res^H^H^HLinux Systems is one of the best in these areas.
What strikes me as odd, is the staff, and the push for "talent." Maybe I am wrong here, but for about 4 months now (at least) it was looking like VARe^H^HLinux Systems was after every and any "Big Name" in the Linux community. It seemed that there wasn't a "plan" because they were all over the map, GUI people, drivers people, etc...
Then, the plan comes to light. Get big names, get attention, get more money, get more backing, get more big name people, get more backing, get more money.... Uh. Well, that's what I see right now anyway. I hope I am wrong.
Now don't get me wrong, VA Linux Systems and it's "partner" companies that it now owns would be a great place to work. And, I can't think of more knowledgeable people to work with than the people VA employees. And, _IF_ they are just hiring talent, and allowing these great coders to just "do thier thing" and write for Linux, that's really cool. But, it just seems a little "lurky" to me. I'd just like to see some clear information out there... For Example:
VA Linux OS Version 6.0 Kit Now, what the heck is this? No more does VA give you a choice of OS's, they made thier own. Well, good, maybe, bad maybe... Considering the talent that is there, this could mean that they have a custom kernel for each system (duals, quads, etc), a nice professional GUI and administration package from thier GUI team, and drivers that are rock solid from the drivers guys on staff. And with all this, you know the staff will be there to "help you out" by getting you the right binary packages, optimized for you system, avaliable on thier FTP sites, orginized just for your system, ready at each software update... Waahoo... Corporate No Brainer Linux Solution. But... I don't think I see that happening, VA's FTP site is REALLY LACKING considering the staff they have there, and they don't say anything about this new "VA Linux OS" package, and I have even emailed them to ask what it's based on (Red Hat I suspect), if anything at all, and they never even wrote me back..
So, Although I see some good there, I still see a lot of spending, and not a lot of "value" that will draw more consumers. So, I don't think I would be standing in line to get at the IPO. At least not with what I know now.
Oh, and the Intel thing... Hard to have a low end system when Intel is your major financial backer. Ever wonder why they don't have any systems for under $2,000 and no systems with AMD processors?
Correction, you mean UNIX, not LINUX!
Linux is not the only OS that can run KDE, Gnome, etc... Don't count my IRIX and FreeBSD boxes out yet, I am quite happy with them, and have no intention of converting them to Linux.
Yea, my spelling is really bad, bad enought that when I do anything important at all, I spell check twice, reread it twice, and get someone to read it over if I can. Luckily, slashdot posts don't rank that high on my "critically impoartant spelling chek lyst." ;-)
Heh.. Somone was typing just a little to fast, and doesn't realize the spelling checker doesn't do names...
You all are way too deep into this "Spy" buisness.... Step back and look at the big picture.
Someone needs to form the "General Public For Computer Privacy" campain or something. Seriously, the word needs to get out, and to the general public, in simple words, without code and jargon, asap.
If your mom could hit a button on her mail client that wraped up her email so that only her sister Betty could read it, she probably would... That's the goal of encription, even though it's not at a fully functional GUI level yet (and partly due to regulations).
Now, tell all those people what encription really means... Tell them that any nosy 16 year old with a part time job at an ISP can probably read all thier email at will. Tell them that encription is about privacy, not about computer hackers in dark rooms braking into the CIA. Your not going to be able to keep encription until the general public understands what it really is.
What are the legal implications? Does this mean that I can't email my friend in Denver if I use pgp in the future if the government has it's way? If that is the legal case, then, it could easily be made a legal case that I can't send him a letter in a sealed envlope with a stamp on it, because no one can "snoop" in the mail easily.
The PEOPLE need to know, so someone needs to tell them. Janet Reno can get on CNN and tell the world that she is makeing it a safer place. Unless someone else can stand up, orginize, and get press coverage, they will believe it. If this was a matter of "makeing the world a safer place" and she proposed allowing open inspection of anyones house without a search warrent, don't you think there would be a few people who could easily understand it and explain the implications to those who don't?
The REAL problem is, we are all just preaching to the choir here... Everyone agrees that we would like to be able to at least ATTEMPT to have a little privacy... But, can you really explain it in terms that your parents, your ministers, your school teachers, and your children can understand? That's where the effort should be focused.
So, I guess, after review, the real questions are:
What are you at liberty to say?
Gotta remember to preview... hate it when I forget to put the bold off tag in.. only meant for the first line to be bold :P
The bus connecting the memory controller and RAM moves data to and from main memory at an astounding 3.2GB per second-six times faster than an AGP 2X graphics bus.-- This would be very good for a server as well.
Combining the most advanced graphics engine available for Windows NT, unheard-of memory bandwidth, and a multiprocessor interface, the memory controller ensures that your most critical data is on the shortest possible path.The tightly coupled Cobalt graphics engine performs lightning- fast 3D geometry, sophisticated shading, lighting, hardware-accelerated texturing, and pixel fill.-- Clearly, they are selling the advantages of thier chipset as "better video preformance." But, when you increas memory I/O rates, and general communication bandwidth in a system, that's going to help out a lot for servers too. Intel Pentium III Xeon Processors Up to four Intel Pentium III Xeon microprocessors provide the pinnacle of Intel processor performance. Your Silicon Graphics 540 workstation features the fastest Intel Pentium III Xeon processors available, with performance-enhancing features such as a dual independent (cache and system) bus TM architecture, dynamic execution, Intel MMX multimedia technology, and a closely coupled Level 2 cache bus running at the full speed of the processor, with cache capacities up to 2MB. -- Clearly, they have a 4 CPU Intel Xeon system, called the "Visual Workstation" that comes very clsoe to thier new Linux/Intel Server claims.
This is all why I suspect that it's the same. Now, there are some features that the Cobalt chipset gives them that will help a server, and it's a lot of work to develop a chipset for a system at this level, so I doubt they will be using something diffrent for the new "server." But at the same time, there are a lot of video and audio subsystems in the Visual Workstation that they could probably remove. And, the focus could be shifted to network capability and away from Video.
So, I guess, after review, the real questions are:
So, coming back at this, I have to think your right, it's a diffrent box, because if they claim "hot swap" they probably have sleds for it. (SGI sleds are WAY to expensive BTW). And, given that one significant differance will probably be in the case, it makes me wonder what the other differances will be... because there may well be many, this might be totally new box, and I sure wish I knew what the specs really were.
I would need to see some significant proof to believe that this hardware is substantually diffrent than the existing Visual Workstation they sell running Windows NT.
No one has mentioned that they have built a totally new hardware configuration, based on Intel CPU's. Therefore, it's only reasonable to conclude that they are mearly installing Linux on the Visual Workstations, and calling it a "server."
The differance between a server and a workstation is in the eyes of the beholder. If you think just calling it "server" makes it diffrent, I would have to point to the countless users who run httpd, ftpd, nfsd, etc on thier "workstations." But, to me, it's neither, it's just a piece of hardware. What they do with that hardware doesn't change the fact that I believe that the hardware is the same.
So, even if it's the same as a Visual Workstation (which is just a "product name," and doesn't automagically make the product incapable of acting as a server), but even if they took that box, and yanked the video card out, it's still the same hardware, and Linux is know to run on it, and X doesn't run on it yet, so, I just don't see anything new here.