I work with Solaris and and have used the unsupported Gnome 1.4 on the following machines:
1. Dual Celeron 533 Mhz PC with 1 GB of RAM, 2x 20 GB drives, ATI XPert 98 video card (24 bit color)
2. A Sparc 20 MP with 2 RT626 125 MHz processors, 336 MB of RAM, 2x 4 GB SCSI disks (256 color)
3. A Sparc 5 85 MHz with 256 MB of RAM, 2x 2 GB hard disks running Solaris 9 Beta.
Gnome was loaded on each machine and the results are as follows:
1. Dual Celeron, came up slow but once it was running was as fast as CDE (it ought to be with that much hardware).
2. Sparc 20, despite the 256 colors which made it look like crap was slow and the CPU utilization was around 20% at idle!
3. Sparc 5, forget it!
A lot of system administrators are not happy with Sun for adopting Gnome (I am one of them) since "eye candy" seems to be more important than functionality. If I am using X as it was meant to be used (remotely) I do not want all my bandwidth and memory sucked up by "useless" features just to run top or prstat from a term window! Don't get me wrong, eye candy is cool, but I don't need eye candy at work!
What I see as wrong with the UI community is:
1. A total lack of standards, this is why the "hardcore" adminstrators will stick with CDE. It was built on a standard that doesn't change with a user's preferences. This is what system administrators want and need!
2. The emphasis on the "desktop" and cool features to mimic Windows, MacOS, and other UI's. It might help in the "experience", but at what cost from a performance aspect?
I think too many people are getting away from what X was supposed to be and that is a networked GUI to allow a system administrator to use graphical applications from another terminal. X has been a little long in the tooth for improvement but I don't think this is it! What I want is a stable desktop to run graphical applications, not have the "latest ubergeek" interface that has transparent windows and other nonsense just to run a term window and the java console for NetBackup!
There are basically two groups that a UI should be designed for, one is the system administrator who wants functionality and reliability over features, the other is the desktop for the "home user" which has the eye candy and the cool features. What needs to happen is that everybody designing UI's for Unix/Linux should get together and hammer out a set of standards for an extensible UI that meets the needs of both sys admins and everyone else. Make the UI customizable to suit the needs of each and do this during installation (rather than the typical X approach of customizing afterward). And keep the code to a "sane" level, I am not saying that it should be coded to support a 386, but at the same time it should also not require an 8 CPU 4500 to run either!
The learning curve of this GUI should be minimal and it does not have to mimic Microsoft, Apple, Sun, or anyone else for that matter. I have used Windows, OS/2, MacOS, SunOS, Solaris, HP-UX, SCO Unix, and Linux and for the most part have figured out what I need to do something pretty quickly. If you are designing for the "clueless luser", then it will require a certain amount of "handholding" whereas with the seasoned user it should be "lean and mean". A very challenging set of goals for those who wish to "accept the challenge".
Robert Escue
System Administrator
I buy computer hardware for both PC's and Sparcs. What I have seen on eBay is items that have anywhere from a ridiculously low to decent selling price and a truly ridicuously price for shipping and handling (same on Pricewatch with some vendors). An example is an auction for a Sparc where the shipping is $35.00 and $5.00 for "careful packing"! And this is for UPS Ground! This is the reason why I virtually ignore Pricewatch and use IBuyer.net. If a person or vendor cannot afford to sell an item at the price they specify in the auction (or retail)without "jacking up" the shipping costs to make up for what they might lose, then maybe they should set a reserve to what they thing the item is worth. In the case of retail, they could possibly lose the sale, oh well.
The other issue with eBay I have are people who use bots to increase the bid at set intervals. I won an auction for an item where I was bidding against one other person obviously using a bot to increase the bid by $5.00 increments every few minutes until "he" reached what the upper limit of what he was going to pay for this item. I needed the item so I paid for it (I won't do it again though). I am still not convinced that some sellers don't use this technique to drive up the price for their items (despite eBay's policy), or that I got "nailed" by some idiot bidding just to bid.
Now I just simply wait, eventually the price comes down to where I am willing to pay for it, or I get lucky and get a deal (like 2 new Sun hme cards for $100.00). Maybe if we all just waited the sellers would have an inventory glut and have to sell it cheap just to get rid of it!
Performance of Solaris x86 and Sun's decision
on
No Solaris 9 for x86
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I have heard from numerous people that Solaris x86 is slow and hard to set up. I use an x86 box to JumpStart my Sparcs and it is definitely not slow! Of course my machine is a dual Celeron rig with 768 MB of RAM and 2 UDMA 100 drives. I find that Solaris x86 performs extremely well given that you install it on hardware that fits the HCL. And that is where the problem lies with people installing Solaris x86, I read through posts on alt.solaris.x86 daily and see people trying to install Solaris with any hardware they just happen to have then bitch about it not working or being too slow! With any OS there is a learning curve and I guess some people just aren't up to the task.
As far as the Blade 100 argument goes, we have 13 Blades at work and 4 of them had to have either system boards, CPU's or other components replaced. The performance of a Blade 100 sucks without a memory upgrade due to the excessive paging in the base configuration (128 MB). We dropped in a second 128 MB stick so that we could install Sun Management Center and the paging virtually stopped! So I wouldn't go around saying "buy a Blade 100", I won't!
I think Sun's management is missing the point with Solaris x86 and the "bottom line". Yes it costs them money to produce it, but if you want to expose the maximum amount of people to it, what easier way than to make an x86 compatible version. Admittedly it might not support some hardware but at least you could use it for some things (like JumpStart servers) and use it as a tool to convince management that Solaris is the way to go. From a learning standpoint it is far easier to build an Intel box that will run Solaris than to buy a Sparc (remember most people learning Solaris do not know the "ins and outs" of Sun hardware). Hopefully Sun will "wake up" and continue to produce Solaris for Intel, even at a loss.
Slashdot Mirror
I work with Solaris and and have used the unsupported Gnome 1.4 on the following machines: 1. Dual Celeron 533 Mhz PC with 1 GB of RAM, 2x 20 GB drives, ATI XPert 98 video card (24 bit color) 2. A Sparc 20 MP with 2 RT626 125 MHz processors, 336 MB of RAM, 2x 4 GB SCSI disks (256 color) 3. A Sparc 5 85 MHz with 256 MB of RAM, 2x 2 GB hard disks running Solaris 9 Beta. Gnome was loaded on each machine and the results are as follows: 1. Dual Celeron, came up slow but once it was running was as fast as CDE (it ought to be with that much hardware). 2. Sparc 20, despite the 256 colors which made it look like crap was slow and the CPU utilization was around 20% at idle! 3. Sparc 5, forget it! A lot of system administrators are not happy with Sun for adopting Gnome (I am one of them) since "eye candy" seems to be more important than functionality. If I am using X as it was meant to be used (remotely) I do not want all my bandwidth and memory sucked up by "useless" features just to run top or prstat from a term window! Don't get me wrong, eye candy is cool, but I don't need eye candy at work! What I see as wrong with the UI community is: 1. A total lack of standards, this is why the "hardcore" adminstrators will stick with CDE. It was built on a standard that doesn't change with a user's preferences. This is what system administrators want and need! 2. The emphasis on the "desktop" and cool features to mimic Windows, MacOS, and other UI's. It might help in the "experience", but at what cost from a performance aspect? I think too many people are getting away from what X was supposed to be and that is a networked GUI to allow a system administrator to use graphical applications from another terminal. X has been a little long in the tooth for improvement but I don't think this is it! What I want is a stable desktop to run graphical applications, not have the "latest ubergeek" interface that has transparent windows and other nonsense just to run a term window and the java console for NetBackup! There are basically two groups that a UI should be designed for, one is the system administrator who wants functionality and reliability over features, the other is the desktop for the "home user" which has the eye candy and the cool features. What needs to happen is that everybody designing UI's for Unix/Linux should get together and hammer out a set of standards for an extensible UI that meets the needs of both sys admins and everyone else. Make the UI customizable to suit the needs of each and do this during installation (rather than the typical X approach of customizing afterward). And keep the code to a "sane" level, I am not saying that it should be coded to support a 386, but at the same time it should also not require an 8 CPU 4500 to run either! The learning curve of this GUI should be minimal and it does not have to mimic Microsoft, Apple, Sun, or anyone else for that matter. I have used Windows, OS/2, MacOS, SunOS, Solaris, HP-UX, SCO Unix, and Linux and for the most part have figured out what I need to do something pretty quickly. If you are designing for the "clueless luser", then it will require a certain amount of "handholding" whereas with the seasoned user it should be "lean and mean". A very challenging set of goals for those who wish to "accept the challenge". Robert Escue System Administrator
I buy computer hardware for both PC's and Sparcs. What I have seen on eBay is items that have anywhere from a ridiculously low to decent selling price and a truly ridicuously price for shipping and handling (same on Pricewatch with some vendors). An example is an auction for a Sparc where the shipping is $35.00 and $5.00 for "careful packing"! And this is for UPS Ground! This is the reason why I virtually ignore Pricewatch and use IBuyer.net. If a person or vendor cannot afford to sell an item at the price they specify in the auction (or retail)without "jacking up" the shipping costs to make up for what they might lose, then maybe they should set a reserve to what they thing the item is worth. In the case of retail, they could possibly lose the sale, oh well. The other issue with eBay I have are people who use bots to increase the bid at set intervals. I won an auction for an item where I was bidding against one other person obviously using a bot to increase the bid by $5.00 increments every few minutes until "he" reached what the upper limit of what he was going to pay for this item. I needed the item so I paid for it (I won't do it again though). I am still not convinced that some sellers don't use this technique to drive up the price for their items (despite eBay's policy), or that I got "nailed" by some idiot bidding just to bid. Now I just simply wait, eventually the price comes down to where I am willing to pay for it, or I get lucky and get a deal (like 2 new Sun hme cards for $100.00). Maybe if we all just waited the sellers would have an inventory glut and have to sell it cheap just to get rid of it!
I have heard from numerous people that Solaris x86 is slow and hard to set up. I use an x86 box to JumpStart my Sparcs and it is definitely not slow! Of course my machine is a dual Celeron rig with 768 MB of RAM and 2 UDMA 100 drives. I find that Solaris x86 performs extremely well given that you install it on hardware that fits the HCL. And that is where the problem lies with people installing Solaris x86, I read through posts on alt.solaris.x86 daily and see people trying to install Solaris with any hardware they just happen to have then bitch about it not working or being too slow! With any OS there is a learning curve and I guess some people just aren't up to the task. As far as the Blade 100 argument goes, we have 13 Blades at work and 4 of them had to have either system boards, CPU's or other components replaced. The performance of a Blade 100 sucks without a memory upgrade due to the excessive paging in the base configuration (128 MB). We dropped in a second 128 MB stick so that we could install Sun Management Center and the paging virtually stopped! So I wouldn't go around saying "buy a Blade 100", I won't! I think Sun's management is missing the point with Solaris x86 and the "bottom line". Yes it costs them money to produce it, but if you want to expose the maximum amount of people to it, what easier way than to make an x86 compatible version. Admittedly it might not support some hardware but at least you could use it for some things (like JumpStart servers) and use it as a tool to convince management that Solaris is the way to go. From a learning standpoint it is far easier to build an Intel box that will run Solaris than to buy a Sparc (remember most people learning Solaris do not know the "ins and outs" of Sun hardware). Hopefully Sun will "wake up" and continue to produce Solaris for Intel, even at a loss.