Any IT manager that would refuse an OSX machine in favor of a Wintel machine shouldn't be an IT manager. Plain and simple.
I'm an IT manager, and I speak from experience. Unfortunately, I spend most of my time dealing with Wintel machines.
Personally, I bought a Mini Mac just for sysadmin purposes. I like the idea of a machine that I can mount NFS shares and easily burn to DVDs (nothing against k3b, which is a great program!).
This machine is not as limited as you think. Just about any expansion you would want is available via USB and firewire.
Memory is upgradeable to 1GB.
I took the 160GB drive out of my Linux box and bought a USB2 enclosure from Walmart to upgrade my Mm. I can't think of anything available on a Windows/Linux box that I can't get for this baby!
I sold my Mini ITX (1Ghz Nehemiah) setup on eBay so that I could purchase my Mini Mac without losing any money. After having used both, I can state this difinitively: In no way does the Nehemiah come close to coming close to being as fast as the G4.
Never mind the media encoding/decoding capabilities of the G4. It doesn't even come close in regular desktop use. Not even with Linux installed. To even do half what the G4 can do encoding/decoding wise, you'd have to add a PVR card (which won't fit in that case).
If the guy is doing this to build the "fastest PC possible with the size constraints of the Mini's small form factor," he should have left the G4 in there (unless PC=Intel/AMD in this case).
I'm all for hardware hacking, but I hate to see a perfectly good machine go to waste. I hope at least that he retrofitted in a non-destructive way so that he can put the original machine back together again. Some people just have too much money...:)
BTW, If I was a VIA executive, there's no way that I would loan out a Nehemiah for review so that it could be pitted against the G4. Nothin' but bad news there. Somebody outta get fired over that one!
That's what I did. I sold my Mini ITX system (with various accessories) and made a little over $600. It didn't cover the entire cost of the Mm since I got the higher-end model and I installed a 1Gb RAM upgrade, but it was close enough.
Of course, I couldn't wait for those auctions to end before getting one so I had to break out the ol' mastercard. Well worth the price, tho!
This is exactly why I switched my servers to SuSE. About $80 a copy for SuSE pro and I get completely automated updates (WITH dependency resolution). And the new SuSE Pro 9.0 is simply AWESOME!
Re:What about email servers on the .kid.us domain?
on
Kid-Safe Domain Created
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Although IANAL, I don't think First Amendment rights apply here as it is an "opt-in" domain (In other words, A person's rights aren't restricted because they can still use the regular Internet for their content).
Here is a good analogy: On our college campus, there are designated areas where groups can stage protests/demonstrations. While it is perfectly OK to protest/demonstrate, you can only do so in those areas. This is done in order to make demonstrations "more manageable" for the University administration. While many may not agree with this type of thing, I think there is definitely precedent here.
What about email servers on the .kid.us domain?
on
Kid-Safe Domain Created
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Are they gonna prosecute porn spammers to email servers on that domain? If so, a lot of adults (including me) will want a.kid.us email account!
Also, a new venture as a non-free (say $5-$10 a month) email service might be a good idea. As an ISP, all you would have to do is report spammers to the USG.
1. MS wouldn't do this, because they would lose money (they would have an upgrade package, but it would be competitively priced).
2. MS wouldn't be the only solution here; companies like AOL/TW, Real or maybe even RedHat (most likely combination packages from various companies) would provide even better solutions than the Microsoft solution that exists today.
3. A modular Windows WILL have a profound impact, because a modular Windows will necessitate an open (equally accessable) platform and the accompanying rules to ensure compliance.
For the record, I think that they blatantly lied about what was feasible, and that MS Embedded is standing proof of that. In fact, if you've ever developed on the Windows platform, it is obvious that it is very modular and object-oriented. MS has good OO programmers. This is what allows them to incorporate many other MS technologies into Windows and achieve superior performance over competitors, by holding out on documentation.
In any event, we shall see tomorrow what is truly possible in a modular Windows (if the law permits).
The only problem with Clump/OS is that it doesn't handle multiple NICs well (it can handle it, but the installation process is a little tougher). This kinda sux because with MOSIX, its better to dedicate a NIC to MOSIX communication and use a second NIC for standard networking. The Clump/OS group is working to better this situation; hopefully they are making progress...
On a brighter note, the Clump/OS has a cool monitor program called ClumpView, which looks awesome!
I'm not buying this... If this where the case, a simple remedy would be to open up parts of the bnet source (for non-commercial use) to remedy the problem.
Developers shouldn't have to reverse engineer the server code anyway, especially when private bnetd servers may decrease the load on Blizzard servers...
How can you play on a bnetd server without the original game? These are separate products, and separate issues. Killing the bnetd servers WON'T diminish piracy of Blizzard games.
We'll see if it is a sound business decision. I'm betting that it isn't.
I couldn't have said it better! I think that people underestimate the influence of the Slashdot community. Also, negative customer feedback can often have a similar effect to a loss in sales.
Let's start firing off those emails!
If they even PERCEIVE a loss in sales, they may re-think their position in this matter. It's happened before...
Of course, in my case, the loss in sales is a reality!
Well for me, Diablo2/LOD is the ONLY reason that I boot to Win2k (I've tried D2 and Wine, but its problematic at best). I run Linux/KDE on the desktop exclusively. I paid for all of my Blizzard software (even for my wife's machine), which is well into $230.
I've been a Blizzard customer since I first downloaded the Diablo Beta (remember those days?), but I'm willing to boycott if the rest of the/. community is. I disapprove of ANY company who actively attempts to enforce the DMCA.
BTW, this will come at a cost to me; my wife has no idea what the f*** the DMCA is, she just wants to build up her Assasin character! Oh well, at least she has Throne of Darkness to fall back on...:)
As a MOSIX user, I think that the MOSIX-newbies reading/. may be getting the
wrong impression about this project.
For starters, MOSIX is MUCH easier to install than both PVM and MPI. In a
nutshell:
Step 1: Install userland programs
Step 2: Recompile kernel w/ MOSIX patch
Step 3: Setup LILO and reboot
Step 4: Repeat steps 2 & 3 for other nodes
NOTE: In my case, I only installed userland programs on the first node.
Although MOSIX is peer-to-peer, which is good, I'm using it with a master node.
Eventually, I plan to set up a second master node for redundancy.
NOTE #2: Most of the install is taken care of by using the install script.
As an example, it took me half a day to set up my first eight-node MOSIX
cluster, and 90% of that time was spent on the first node.
On User-MOSIX vs. Kernel-MOSIX: I think we may be missing an important point
here, as well:
It may be possible to incorporate U-MOSIX in places where K-MOSIX is not
possible (access to source code is required with K-MOSIX!). However, I do
think that a bit of salesmanship may be going into the description of U-MOSIX:
From the mosix.org website:
"U-MOSIX is better tuned for cluster and GRID computing, including the ability
to handle large number of short processes, run in heterogeneous clusters, with
different versions of Unix such as FreeBSD, Linux and Solaris"
How so? K-MOSIX is designed for hetero clustering. Large number of short
processes? The only way I can see this is with TCP/IP apps and socket
migration or with one helluva Myrinet connection between nodes. I can see the
advantage in *nix compatibility with userland MOSIX, but clustering
capabilities? I'll believe it when I see it. One of the principle advantages
of MOSIX that I have seen over Condor and the like is that MOSIX is
kernel-level. I've done my share of benchmarks, and nothing comes close.
The statements on the mosix.org website lead me to believe that U-MOSIX is
headed for commercial space. I hold no affiliation with either Professor
Barak or Moshe Bar, but I will say this: If Prof. Barak can produce
user-level code that outperforms K-MOSIX, then he deserves commercial
compensation and I will be the first in line to order.
I think that both gentlemen have done an outstanding job in producing a tool to
be used by researchers around the globe. My greatest hope is that this
development will spur competition (innovation is a better word, but WAY
overused!) between the two organizations.
Political Sidenote: I do feel that public educational funding should == open
source, but federal research funding is a different matter. This type of
funding is typically project-based, and IMHO the licensing of such should be
the decision of the government involved. I would, however, like to know the
specific problem that Professor Barak has with the GPL (assuming that the
rumors are true).
Re:AFAICT Mosix is completely worthless
on
OpenMosix
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You miss the whole point of MOSIX. At our Center, we use it to manage the execution of MANY jobs across the cluster. If it is not beneficial to do so, the job won't migrate. This is an entirely different type of cluster than MPI or PVM with a different goal in mind (and consequently, different pros/cons). In our case, MOSIX is a better solution because it doesn't require domain decomposition.
No, and that's the beauty of MOSIX. You don't even have to recompile! And forking apps will fork over the cluster as well.
This is not to say that you can't run PVM or MPI on top of MOSIX. In fact, IIRC, MPI actually runs BETTER when used in conjunction with MOSIX (???) Anyone have any hard numbers here?
Re:how does mosix deal with dead cluster members?
on
OpenMosix
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Nothing. The cluster will live on, because it is actually a peer-to-peer system (not client/server). This is in the docs somewhere.
However, if a node dies abruptly, the job may be lost (I'm not sure here, because it hasn't happened to me yet). Logically, the submitting node should see that the node has died and should re-submit to a good node. Anyone have a difinitive answer on this?
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly! It's the reason why we pay $20 for popcorn and a coke at the theater.
No sympathy for you!!
C=:-)
Wintel vs. X-tel
Pronounced "ten - tel"?
Use it to match funds for K12 schools that build computer labs based on OSS.
Disclaimer: My wife is a K12 teacher...
Any IT manager that would refuse an OSX machine in favor of a Wintel machine shouldn't be an IT manager. Plain and simple.
I'm an IT manager, and I speak from experience. Unfortunately, I spend most of my time dealing with Wintel machines.
Personally, I bought a Mini Mac just for sysadmin purposes. I like the idea of a machine that I can mount NFS shares and easily burn to DVDs (nothing against k3b, which is a great program!).
This machine is not as limited as you think. Just about any expansion you would want is available via USB and firewire.
Memory is upgradeable to 1GB.
I took the 160GB drive out of my Linux box and bought a USB2 enclosure from Walmart to upgrade my Mm. I can't think of anything available on a Windows/Linux box that I can't get for this baby!
Here's a better idea: get rid of the PC altogether and let's all switch to Mini Macs!
I sold my Mini ITX (1Ghz Nehemiah) setup on eBay so that I could purchase my Mini Mac without losing any money. After having used both, I can state this difinitively: In no way does the Nehemiah come close to coming close to being as fast as the G4.
:)
Never mind the media encoding/decoding capabilities of the G4. It doesn't even come close in regular desktop use. Not even with Linux installed. To even do half what the G4 can do encoding/decoding wise, you'd have to add a PVR card (which won't fit in that case).
If the guy is doing this to build the "fastest PC possible with the size constraints of the Mini's small form factor," he should have left the G4 in there (unless PC=Intel/AMD in this case).
I'm all for hardware hacking, but I hate to see a perfectly good machine go to waste. I hope at least that he retrofitted in a non-destructive way so that he can put the original machine back together again. Some people just have too much money...
BTW, If I was a VIA executive, there's no way that I would loan out a Nehemiah for review so that it could be pitted against the G4. Nothin' but bad news there. Somebody outta get fired over that one!
That's what I did. I sold my Mini ITX system (with various accessories) and made a little over $600. It didn't cover the entire cost of the Mm since I got the higher-end model and I installed a 1Gb RAM upgrade, but it was close enough.
Of course, I couldn't wait for those auctions to end before getting one so I had to break out the ol' mastercard. Well worth the price, tho!
If Real is so interested in Linux support, why doesn't the Real Music Store support Linux? Open-source browsers?
From the Music Store page:
"Downloads are only available on PCs running Windows 98 and up and with:
* Internet Explorer 5.5, or newer
* Netscape 7.0, or newer"
This is exactly why I switched my servers to SuSE. About $80 a copy for SuSE pro and I get completely automated updates (WITH dependency resolution). And the new SuSE Pro 9.0 is simply AWESOME!
Although IANAL, I don't think First Amendment rights apply here as it is an "opt-in" domain (In other words, A person's rights aren't restricted because they can still use the regular Internet for their content).
Here is a good analogy: On our college campus, there are designated areas where groups can stage protests/demonstrations. While it is perfectly OK to protest/demonstrate, you can only do so in those areas. This is done in order to make demonstrations "more manageable" for the University administration. While many may not agree with this type of thing, I think there is definitely precedent here.
Are they gonna prosecute porn spammers to email servers on that domain? If so, a lot of adults (including me) will want a .kid.us email account!
Also, a new venture as a non-free (say $5-$10 a month) email service might be a good idea. As an ISP, all you would have to do is report spammers to the USG.
1. MS wouldn't do this, because they would lose money (they would have an upgrade package, but it would be competitively priced).
2. MS wouldn't be the only solution here; companies like AOL/TW, Real or maybe even RedHat (most likely combination packages from various companies) would provide even better solutions than the Microsoft solution that exists today.
3. A modular Windows WILL have a profound impact, because a modular Windows will necessitate an open (equally accessable) platform and the accompanying rules to ensure compliance.
For the record, I think that they blatantly lied about what was feasible, and that MS Embedded is standing proof of that. In fact, if you've ever developed on the Windows platform, it is obvious that it is very modular and object-oriented. MS has good OO programmers. This is what allows them to incorporate many other MS technologies into Windows and achieve superior performance over competitors, by holding out on documentation.
In any event, we shall see tomorrow what is truly possible in a modular Windows (if the law permits).
Here is some background:
. pl ?node_id=41457&page=1&lastnode_id=41457
http://foundries.sourceforge.net/clusters/index
"perfectly scalable" == "scales linearly"
I got all of the kde3 packages, but where the #$&* do I have to go to get THIS?
error: failed dependencies:
qt >= 3.0.3 is needed by kdelibs-3.0-0.rc3.1
I've searched all over the mirror sites and rpmfind, with no luck!
The only problem with Clump/OS is that it doesn't handle multiple NICs well (it can handle it, but the installation process is a little tougher). This kinda sux because with MOSIX, its better to dedicate a NIC to MOSIX communication and use a second NIC for standard networking. The Clump/OS group is working to better this situation; hopefully they are making progress...
On a brighter note, the Clump/OS has a cool monitor program called ClumpView, which looks awesome!
I'm not buying this... If this where the case, a simple remedy would be to open up parts of the bnet source (for non-commercial use) to remedy the problem.
Developers shouldn't have to reverse engineer the server code anyway, especially when private bnetd servers may decrease the load on Blizzard servers...
How can you play on a bnetd server without the original game? These are separate products, and separate issues. Killing the bnetd servers WON'T diminish piracy of Blizzard games.
We'll see if it is a sound business decision. I'm betting that it isn't.
I couldn't have said it better! I think that people underestimate the influence of the Slashdot community. Also, negative customer feedback can often have a similar effect to a loss in sales.
Let's start firing off those emails!
If they even PERCEIVE a loss in sales, they may re-think their position in this matter. It's happened before...
Of course, in my case, the loss in sales is a reality!
Well for me, Diablo2/LOD is the ONLY reason that I boot to Win2k (I've tried D2 and Wine, but its problematic at best). I run Linux/KDE on the desktop exclusively. I paid for all of my Blizzard software (even for my wife's machine), which is well into $230.
/. community is. I disapprove of ANY company who actively attempts to enforce the DMCA.
:)
I've been a Blizzard customer since I first downloaded the Diablo Beta (remember those days?), but I'm willing to boycott if the rest of the
BTW, this will come at a cost to me; my wife has no idea what the f*** the DMCA is, she just wants to build up her Assasin character! Oh well, at least she has Throne of Darkness to fall back on...
As a MOSIX user, I think that the MOSIX-newbies reading /. may be getting the
wrong impression about this project.
For starters, MOSIX is MUCH easier to install than both PVM and MPI. In a
nutshell:
Step 1: Install userland programs
Step 2: Recompile kernel w/ MOSIX patch
Step 3: Setup LILO and reboot
Step 4: Repeat steps 2 & 3 for other nodes
NOTE: In my case, I only installed userland programs on the first node.
Although MOSIX is peer-to-peer, which is good, I'm using it with a master node.
Eventually, I plan to set up a second master node for redundancy.
NOTE #2: Most of the install is taken care of by using the install script.
As an example, it took me half a day to set up my first eight-node MOSIX
cluster, and 90% of that time was spent on the first node.
On User-MOSIX vs. Kernel-MOSIX: I think we may be missing an important point
here, as well:
It may be possible to incorporate U-MOSIX in places where K-MOSIX is not
possible (access to source code is required with K-MOSIX!). However, I do
think that a bit of salesmanship may be going into the description of U-MOSIX:
From the mosix.org website:
"U-MOSIX is better tuned for cluster and GRID computing, including the ability
to handle large number of short processes, run in heterogeneous clusters, with
different versions of Unix such as FreeBSD, Linux and Solaris"
How so? K-MOSIX is designed for hetero clustering. Large number of short
processes? The only way I can see this is with TCP/IP apps and socket
migration or with one helluva Myrinet connection between nodes. I can see the
advantage in *nix compatibility with userland MOSIX, but clustering
capabilities? I'll believe it when I see it. One of the principle advantages
of MOSIX that I have seen over Condor and the like is that MOSIX is
kernel-level. I've done my share of benchmarks, and nothing comes close.
The statements on the mosix.org website lead me to believe that U-MOSIX is
headed for commercial space. I hold no affiliation with either Professor
Barak or Moshe Bar, but I will say this: If Prof. Barak can produce
user-level code that outperforms K-MOSIX, then he deserves commercial
compensation and I will be the first in line to order.
I think that both gentlemen have done an outstanding job in producing a tool to
be used by researchers around the globe. My greatest hope is that this
development will spur competition (innovation is a better word, but WAY
overused!) between the two organizations.
Political Sidenote: I do feel that public educational funding should == open
source, but federal research funding is a different matter. This type of
funding is typically project-based, and IMHO the licensing of such should be
the decision of the government involved. I would, however, like to know the
specific problem that Professor Barak has with the GPL (assuming that the
rumors are true).
You miss the whole point of MOSIX. At our Center, we use it to manage the execution of MANY jobs across the cluster. If it is not beneficial to do so, the job won't migrate. This is an entirely different type of cluster than MPI or PVM with a different goal in mind (and consequently, different pros/cons). In our case, MOSIX is a better solution because it doesn't require domain decomposition.
No, and that's the beauty of MOSIX. You don't even have to recompile! And forking apps will fork over the cluster as well.
This is not to say that you can't run PVM or MPI on top of MOSIX. In fact, IIRC, MPI actually runs BETTER when used in conjunction with MOSIX (???) Anyone have any hard numbers here?
Nothing. The cluster will live on, because it is actually a peer-to-peer system (not client/server). This is in the docs somewhere.
However, if a node dies abruptly, the job may be lost (I'm not sure here, because it hasn't happened to me yet). Logically, the submitting node should see that the node has died and should re-submit to a good node. Anyone have a difinitive answer on this?