Tried KNOPPIX or UBUNTU lately? Linux has been easier and faster to install than that other OS for years now. In recent years, I have taught students how to set up a simple web server in under five minutes. Last month, my students installed a basic Linux installation on a ten year old PC. Not one student found it hard. I handed out KNOPPIX CDs to take home and only one student had a problem (resolution of a monitor). A squad of MSCEs came in and failed to install SP2 on half our Windows machines. They had no clue what went wrong with the network install on bunches of identical machines. I had a Debian mirror on our LAN and could have done the job in twenty minutes. We also have had many users that could not print or log in for months in Windows. I know XP is a darn sight better for many things than '95, but easy it is not. Ray Ozzie, on Microsoft products wrote that "complexity kills". Windows' complexity creates the holes for malware, the headaches for admins, and difficulty for installation and setup. Linux and other systems do not have this unnecessary complexity that gets in the way of doing the job.
Wikipedia is huge. It dwarfs Britannica even though Britannica claims to give "Access to more content than any other English-language encyclopedia." with 120000 articles, Wikipedia has more, 849,792. Granted, there may be more depth or better quality of writing in Britannica, but you cannot beat Wikipedia for currency. You might be interested in the traffic stats for both
My point is this, while trolls are a nuisance, and some are energetic, most humans come to Wikipedia to learn or to teach. There will always be enough good guys to fix the damage of vandals. Otherwise, we should move to a better neighbourhood.
Some Anonymous Coward wrote:"why the US is in the forefront of technological innovation and Argentina is not."
The US used to be in the forefront of technological innovation. That is long past. Now the US is in the forefront of litigation. M$ comes to mind. Bloat and obsolescence are honoured in the US. Check out Asia. M$ is in rapid decline there. The top reason for businesses to switch to Linux is that their competitors have switched and they are at a disadvantage without using Linux. M$ is selling 20th C products in the 21st C. That doesn't fly well. The rest of the world will eat them for lunch. Look at automobiles. The US is still using gas guzzlers. Look at steel. etc.
Look at Intel. They are selling their chips at a very high price compared to AMD for similar performance and using more power, too. Intel is going down because the world can see they are second rate. Both of these US corporations do most of their business outside the US and are essentially global e.g. http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/manufacturing/ manufacturing_at_a_glance.pdfhttp://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/AboutAMD/0,,51_ 52_502,00.html
The cyclotron going to Alaska is sixties technology. It produces only a little gamma radiation if C12 blocks are used to prevent neutron emission. It should have some concrete shielding or be placed underground. Very little chance of environmental contamination. Internal parts may be readioactive.
I am in the process of getting rid of the last Lose98 machine in my department. It's used as a print server and a GUI, unlocked, open to anyone who stumbles by.... shudder.... A Linux box is cued up and ready to go as print server with no mouse, keyboard or monitor. I just have to get the right memo out and dodge complaints that something on the network has changed. I do not think M$ is the problem. It's all the addicts who use the stuff. An OS that was obsolete the day it was installed and is still widely used 7 years later is an amazing artifact of a company that claims it is an innovator. It's more like a comic book super-villain who has frozen people in time...
That's just the hardware replacement cost because Microsoft and the PC manufacturers conspire to replace about evry three years while Linux users can go five years easily.
The software cost differences are small for thin client/server systems because whatever it costs is divided by N where N is the number of clients. The per-seat cost of Microsoft does not go away, however.
Maintenance costs of the software are much higher with Microsoft because you have to do a lot of rebooting (downtime) and there are just more patches per unit of software. Microsoft has about the same number of patches just for its OS as Linux does for the OS and all its apps.
The real big cost difference is malware. Billions are spent on fixing damaged Microsoft systems annually and the downtime has costs. I have worked with hundreds of Linux systems and never had any downtime for malware. Most Microsoft systems I have seen need annual re-installation and maintenance as well as patches.
Didio has given up selling us on Windows. Now she wants to delay switching to preserve the monopoly and maximize profits for Microsoft. If anyone had a car that had the wheels fall off every day and the manufacturer refused to fix it, would we hesitate to get another car? Would we weigh the cost/benfit? No! Microsoft is killing computing. It is a cancer breaking down the immune system of IT. We can see the huge costs of it and it is life threatening. There is no need to measure cost benefit. Almost anything else would be better if it is modular and has any natural immunity to malware such as the unices. Linux being free in many senses and having a wide, satisified customer base, is a readily available reliable alternative. One does not need cost breakdowns to make the choice.
Does Linux do the job? Yes. Take it.
I switched to Linux years ago. Windows was driving me crazy with crashes hourly. I have not regretted the switch for an instant. I have used Linux on hundreds of systems with great success. I have rarely had a crash and most of them were soft landings involving the GUI. I have never lost data. I have never had a virus. I have had unlimited uptime. I have had good performance and software selection. Using Linux Terminal Server, I have been able to run thirty old machines from one new machine with Linux. There is no comparision in cost between a per-seat licensed system full of bugs and a free system with few bugs.
I would think a man as familiar with Linux as you are would have promptly notified them of the errors in the campaign to belittle Linux. In particular, you know that a proper installation of Linux is
very secure
fast
flexible
rugged
inexpensive
easy to install
easy to maintain
and yet they continue to try to put Linux down. Have you told them how silly that makes Microsoft look in the eyes of anyone who knows the truth and that it is illegal and immoral to spread lies about competitors?
On my system, the firewall and the filter are involved. The firewall forces people to get out through the proxy, squid, which only communicates with dansguardian, a filter. Dansguardian can block certain IPs, URLs, words in URLs, and words in pages, and file types. It still is not perfect because images can get through unfiltered, but it is very useful in my school, where kids are willing to try anything and go anywhere. The firewall filters on source, destination, protocol, userid, state and the filter looks at banned lists, file types and text content.
Of course, there is always a way around like proxy sites or encryption of content, but the usual user is no problem.
That's 12 minutes to install a CD of Linux and five minutes to install the AMP packages. A typical php script can be installed in ten minutes or so from local files. Time is less for a boot from a live CD which is feasible if the dynamic stuff is stored on the network.
I typically install LAMP even on desktops so webapps can be run locally. The browser is just another GUI.
There is no way that other OS should be mentioned on the same page as Linux for web services. Linux wins hands down.
The folks locked into that other OS are to be pitied. It is not that Windows is wonderful, but that they have been allowed to establish and maintain a monopoly by illegal means. If they were so good they would not have to use illegal means. Look at the "final agreement". They are allowed to set quotas to distributors at the 50% level and servers aren't even covered. They are allowed to punish distributors that ship PCs without Windows. What a sham when DOJ helps the criminals in their wrongdoing.
squiggleslash wrote:"yeah, you can patent the technology behind the scroll wheel if you want, if it really is novel,"
I doubt the novelty. When I was a kid long ago, old folks used radios in wooden cases with vacuum tubes that emitted orange light. One of my favourite controls was the tuning knob which usually manipulated a sliding pointer by means of a cord wrapped around the shaft to indicate the frequency or wavelength of the active channel.
I know the ipod does not use a cord, but this really is a case of re-inventing the wheel. Where is the novelty? Where is the creative solution making the world a better place and spurring industry? What problem does it solve?
Ingenious, isn't it? Set up facilities world wide to make life easy for spammers and tax them. It is legal but it makes Microsoft's customers pay for their own abuse. Microsoft=masochism
Google is a search engine farm. It would take a while for anyone to catch up even with a better recipe. If IBM's stuff is FOSS, Google could use it.
This is good news anyway. Keyword/phrase searching becomes less useful as the universe expands. I have 11000 texts fully indexed with swish-e and I get way too many hits unless I use phrases. If I knew what phrase was in the books I sought, I would not need the search engine.
I love search engines because I cannot figure out how to organize a file cabinet or a hard drive...
I work in a school where the workload is likely less and most of our systems are identical, but we usually go two Microsoft cycles before upgrading and junk the old stuff. Our spending is way less than 1% of budget.
What I would do with 3% is spend like mad on the hottest hardware for a thin client server (using Linux) each year so our CPU power/memory/storage capability would increase linearly, replace mice, keyboards, screens (with a shift to LCD), fans, power supplies and thin clients as needed. Having only a small cluster of servers running identical stuff would really cut the maintenance load and allow spending on stuff people touch like mice/keyboards and printers. If you keep those things looking good, keep the system getting faster instead of slower, keep files safe and do not let it crash with failover protections you will be a hero. With that kind of cash I could have backups for my backups and hardware that would just keep going.
Last year, I was in a school that spent $50000+labour going from Lose98/NT to XP/2003. Using a Linux terminal server and replacing the ten year old boxes (the six year olds were solid) would have cost $5000+labour, a lot less labour. Updating XP on all our desktops took two days with all kinds of problems. Updating the Linux terminal server can usually be done in an hour or so apart from download time. At 3% of cash flow, I would have had $150000 to play with... I might not have had room to hold the goodies.
I kept the cut images just long enough to count them and to detect duplicates and thumbs/full size. I also had to hunt down links in the Wikipedia database, so I needed the filenames for a while. This allowed me to check the relevance to the article. I culled the images in bulk with an "image viewer" that permitted displaying about twenty pix at a time and cut and pasted them to the garbage directory.
I live in Canada which is in the Americas.
I see no reason a fifth-grader should find an article on bondage/sado-masochism when enquiring about sex or reproduction. While adults may play whatever games they wish without hurting anyone, we attempt to teach youngsters to respect each other and bondage is likely contrary to our criminal code so is way beyond community standards here. If it were just for high-school and there was no legal issue, I might have left such stuff in. Youngsters need information, but just the basics. That is what I meant by "too open-minded". I am pretty open-minded, but I work in small communities in publicly funded schools and have to consider paedagogical value and community standards. Any teacher or student who needs such material can find it on their own without me providing it.
I am a teacher and I wanted my students to have access to Wikipedia. The raw site on the web had lots of stuff that was inappropriate in a K-12 school so I took a snapshot from their download area and edited the whole thing. It took two weeks to screen 24 gB of images. As an indicator of quality, I had only to delete about 100 images. Some were clearly irrelevant to the articles in which they appeared and some were just too much information for young kids, That took me two weeks. I also looked for things that were a little too open-minded for school. I edited a lot of stuff about sex and drugs. That took another week. On the local copy, I have locked out local editing except for the boss, me. This has been a great resource. Because it is local, no bandwidth to the ISP is used and it is fast. It takes a few seconds to find anything and even kids as young as grade 4 have used it successfully. My snapshot was six months ago. Wikipedia has grown since then. If I take another snapshot, I will ask a committee of volunteers to help. Perhaps we could distribute the result as a kid-safe version of Wikipedia. Another option would be to fork off from Wikipedia and invite teachers/parents/responsible students to contribute articles, but this would be much slower than contributing to the real Wikipedia and taking their backups.
Find an old box like a Pentium I with 64 MB RAM. Ideally it can boot Windows 95 or such archaic system. With no network connection, boot it up and time it. Show the software available with a basic installation. Then boot with Thin Station or LTSP and start an X session to a hot Linux server. The apparently huge increase in speed will shock them. The awe part comes when you show them all the software available in the installation of Linux, like OpenOffice, multiple browsers, spreadsheets, databases, servers, graphics, audio-visual software and mention that you are demonstrating today's software accessed from a machine that was obsolete a decade ago and that it is free of Gates' EULA and licence fees. Mention that Gates' abandoned that hardware about 8 years ago and folks have upgraded that other OS and the platform several times since then for little benefit.
Debian is a good choice. Apt is a fantastic packaging system. Go with a thin client server, too. Rather than LTSP, I would recommend ThinStation booting from CD. If you have a client who does video, you can give them a gigabit connection to a switch. For more security, you may want to use X over SSH or NX technology. Unfortunately, there is no 64 bit version of NX yet. If you do not need NX, I would defiitely recommend a 64 bit server just for the bus bandwidth on the mobo. Use software RAID 1 for reliability and RAID 0 for speed or RAID 0+1 for both. If you do not put hard drives in each client, RAID actually saves you money as you will use fewer drives overall. A thin client server is very cost effective in your situation as you may have as few as one software installation for as many clients as you can run off one server, typically 30 with 2gB RAM.
Use CAT-5 unless mobility or distance are a problem. It is useful to use a gigabit to 10/100 switch to avoid a bottleneck at the server. Performance is best when everyone can run at full speed. With thin client, the only bottleneck is likely to be CPU, but only for spikes. It is unlikely that two users will spike at the same time in such a small group, except for boot up or log in. Leave the server run 24/7 and the memory cache will speed up everything.
Any sort of networking goes better with LINUX. IF you are going to use LINUX on the server, unless there is a must-use app that is only available for that other OS, go Linux everywhere. A single Debian repository can be mirrored locally for lightening fast installations.
the only people who use software RAID are the ones doing it on the cheap.
Not necessarily. A decent PC is 64 bit 3000MHz with 1gb RAM and a few hundred gigabytes of storage. What more does anyone need? This isn't cheap, it is practical. If you want redundancy use software RAID 1 or network a bunch of boxes. If you need more speed, use software RAID 0 or 0+1. Who cares if a few CPU cycles go in the process? I have a system on my desk that serves eight clients as thin terminals. Nine of us use the thing simultaneously and it never bogs down. I use RAID 1 so I have redundancy and two users do not have to wait, but i have so much RAM, the drive light rarely comes on. This system cost $1000. It has 400 gB storage.What advantage would there be to hardware RAID?
hdparm -tT/dev/md3 /dev/md3: Timing cached reads: 1728 MB in 2.00 seconds = 863.27 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 174 MB in 3.03 seconds = 57.47 MB/sec
hdparm -tT/dev/hda2
/dev/hda2: Timing cached reads: 1716 MB in 2.00 seconds = 857.27 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 186 MB in 3.04 seconds = 61.27 MB/sec
Software raid has a role. It is the right thing to do in many cases.
I use OO on a LAN in the high school. Students are the only users besides myself. Staff don't know/don't care and the students love it. It has a mouse and a menu. A school could save big bucks if only thed students converted.
This board has 8 sockets on one Opteron and 4 on the other. If you read the fine print in the
manual, you will find you must go down to 266 DDR to use 8 memory modules on the one CPU.
Higher temperatures increase noise levels. Room temperature is about.025 electron volt. 600C is about.075 ev I think silicon carbide or gallium arsenide are suitable semiconductors but they would need to be fabricated at higher temperatures, making precision much more difficult. On the mobo, you would have to insulate or cool all the heat sensitive components in the neighborhood
Put the powerful server in the attic or basement and network to a fanless thin client. You can also try longer video/mouse/keyboard cables if you cannot go fanless.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes they are!
Tried KNOPPIX or UBUNTU lately? Linux has been easier and faster to install than that other OS for years now. In recent years, I have taught students how to set up a simple web server in under five minutes. Last month, my students installed a basic Linux installation on a ten year old PC. Not one student found it hard. I handed out KNOPPIX CDs to take home and only one student had a problem (resolution of a monitor). A squad of MSCEs came in and failed to install SP2 on half our Windows machines. They had no clue what went wrong with the network install on bunches of identical machines. I had a Debian mirror on our LAN and could have done the job in twenty minutes. We also have had many users that could not print or log in for months in Windows. I know XP is a darn sight better for many things than '95, but easy it is not. Ray Ozzie, on Microsoft products wrote that "complexity kills". Windows' complexity creates the holes for malware, the headaches for admins, and difficulty for installation and setup. Linux and other systems do not have this unnecessary complexity that gets in the way of doing the job.
My point is this, while trolls are a nuisance, and some are energetic, most humans come to Wikipedia to learn or to teach. There will always be enough good guys to fix the damage of vandals. Otherwise, we should move to a better neighbourhood.
Some Anonymous Coward wrote:"why the US is in the forefront of technological innovation and Argentina is not." The US used to be in the forefront of technological innovation. That is long past. Now the US is in the forefront of litigation. M$ comes to mind. Bloat and obsolescence are honoured in the US. Check out Asia. M$ is in rapid decline there. The top reason for businesses to switch to Linux is that their competitors have switched and they are at a disadvantage without using Linux. M$ is selling 20th C products in the 21st C. That doesn't fly well. The rest of the world will eat them for lunch. Look at automobiles. The US is still using gas guzzlers. Look at steel. etc. Look at Intel. They are selling their chips at a very high price compared to AMD for similar performance and using more power, too. Intel is going down because the world can see they are second rate. Both of these US corporations do most of their business outside the US and are essentially global e.g. http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/manufacturing/ manufacturing_at_a_glance.pdf
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/AboutAMD/0,,51_ 52_502,00.html
The cyclotron going to Alaska is sixties technology. It produces only a little gamma radiation if C12 blocks are used to prevent neutron emission. It should have some concrete shielding or be placed underground. Very little chance of environmental contamination. Internal parts may be readioactive.
I am in the process of getting rid of the last Lose98 machine in my department. It's used as a print server and a GUI, unlocked, open to anyone who stumbles by.... shudder.... A Linux box is cued up and ready to go as print server with no mouse, keyboard or monitor. I just have to get the right memo out and dodge complaints that something on the network has changed. I do not think M$ is the problem. It's all the addicts who use the stuff. An OS that was obsolete the day it was installed and is still widely used 7 years later is an amazing artifact of a company that claims it is an innovator. It's more like a comic book super-villain who has frozen people in time...
I like having choices, but sometimes it is tough making the choice.
The software cost differences are small for thin client/server systems because whatever it costs is divided by N where N is the number of clients. The per-seat cost of Microsoft does not go away, however.
Maintenance costs of the software are much higher with Microsoft because you have to do a lot of rebooting (downtime) and there are just more patches per unit of software. Microsoft has about the same number of patches just for its OS as Linux does for the OS and all its apps.
The real big cost difference is malware. Billions are spent on fixing damaged Microsoft systems annually and the downtime has costs. I have worked with hundreds of Linux systems and never had any downtime for malware. Most Microsoft systems I have seen need annual re-installation and maintenance as well as patches.
Does Linux do the job? Yes. Take it. I switched to Linux years ago. Windows was driving me crazy with crashes hourly. I have not regretted the switch for an instant. I have used Linux on hundreds of systems with great success. I have rarely had a crash and most of them were soft landings involving the GUI. I have never lost data. I have never had a virus. I have had unlimited uptime. I have had good performance and software selection. Using Linux Terminal Server, I have been able to run thirty old machines from one new machine with Linux. There is no comparision in cost between a per-seat licensed system full of bugs and a free system with few bugs.
- very secure
- fast
- flexible
- rugged
- inexpensive
- easy to install
- easy to maintain
and yet they continue to try to put Linux down. Have you told them how silly that makes Microsoft look in the eyes of anyone who knows the truth and that it is illegal and immoral to spread lies about competitors?Of course, there is always a way around like proxy sites or encryption of content, but the usual user is no problem.
I typically install LAMP even on desktops so webapps can be run locally. The browser is just another GUI.
There is no way that other OS should be mentioned on the same page as Linux for web services. Linux wins hands down.
The folks locked into that other OS are to be pitied. It is not that Windows is wonderful, but that they have been allowed to establish and maintain a monopoly by illegal means. If they were so good they would not have to use illegal means. Look at the "final agreement". They are allowed to set quotas to distributors at the 50% level and servers aren't even covered. They are allowed to punish distributors that ship PCs without Windows. What a sham when DOJ helps the criminals in their wrongdoing.
I doubt the novelty. When I was a kid long ago, old folks used radios in wooden cases with vacuum tubes that emitted orange light. One of my favourite controls was the tuning knob which usually manipulated a sliding pointer by means of a cord wrapped around the shaft to indicate the frequency or wavelength of the active channel.
I know the ipod does not use a cord, but this really is a case of re-inventing the wheel. Where is the novelty? Where is the creative solution making the world a better place and spurring industry? What problem does it solve?
I disagree. If you tell me negative information, I know you are lying, assuming there are a few fragments of positive information rattling around.
This is good news anyway. Keyword/phrase searching becomes less useful as the universe expands. I have 11000 texts fully indexed with swish-e and I get way too many hits unless I use phrases. If I knew what phrase was in the books I sought, I would not need the search engine.
I love search engines because I cannot figure out how to organize a file cabinet or a hard drive...
I work in a school where the workload is likely less and most of our systems are identical, but we usually go two Microsoft cycles before upgrading and junk the old stuff. Our spending is way less than 1% of budget.
What I would do with 3% is spend like mad on the hottest hardware for a thin client server (using Linux) each year so our CPU power/memory/storage capability would increase linearly, replace mice, keyboards, screens (with a shift to LCD), fans, power supplies and thin clients as needed. Having only a small cluster of servers running identical stuff would really cut the maintenance load and allow spending on stuff people touch like mice/keyboards and printers. If you keep those things looking good, keep the system getting faster instead of slower, keep files safe and do not let it crash with failover protections you will be a hero. With that kind of cash I could have backups for my backups and hardware that would just keep going.
Last year, I was in a school that spent $50000+labour going from Lose98/NT to XP/2003. Using a Linux terminal server and replacing the ten year old boxes (the six year olds were solid) would have cost $5000+labour, a lot less labour. Updating XP on all our desktops took two days with all kinds of problems. Updating the Linux terminal server can usually be done in an hour or so apart from download time. At 3% of cash flow, I would have had $150000 to play with... I might not have had room to hold the goodies.
I live in Canada which is in the Americas.
I see no reason a fifth-grader should find an article on bondage/sado-masochism when enquiring about sex or reproduction. While adults may play whatever games they wish without hurting anyone, we attempt to teach youngsters to respect each other and bondage is likely contrary to our criminal code so is way beyond community standards here. If it were just for high-school and there was no legal issue, I might have left such stuff in. Youngsters need information, but just the basics. That is what I meant by "too open-minded". I am pretty open-minded, but I work in small communities in publicly funded schools and have to consider paedagogical value and community standards. Any teacher or student who needs such material can find it on their own without me providing it.
Find an old box like a Pentium I with 64 MB RAM. Ideally it can boot Windows 95 or such archaic system. With no network connection, boot it up and time it. Show the software available with a basic installation. Then boot with Thin Station or LTSP and start an X session to a hot Linux server. The apparently huge increase in speed will shock them. The awe part comes when you show them all the software available in the installation of Linux, like OpenOffice, multiple browsers, spreadsheets, databases, servers, graphics, audio-visual software and mention that you are demonstrating today's software accessed from a machine that was obsolete a decade ago and that it is free of Gates' EULA and licence fees. Mention that Gates' abandoned that hardware about 8 years ago and folks have upgraded that other OS and the platform several times since then for little benefit.
Debian is a good choice. Apt is a fantastic packaging system. Go with a thin client server, too. Rather than LTSP, I would recommend ThinStation booting from CD. If you have a client who does video, you can give them a gigabit connection to a switch. For more security, you may want to use X over SSH or NX technology. Unfortunately, there is no 64 bit version of NX yet. If you do not need NX, I would defiitely recommend a 64 bit server just for the bus bandwidth on the mobo. Use software RAID 1 for reliability and RAID 0 for speed or RAID 0+1 for both. If you do not put hard drives in each client, RAID actually saves you money as you will use fewer drives overall. A thin client server is very cost effective in your situation as you may have as few as one software installation for as many clients as you can run off one server, typically 30 with 2gB RAM.
Use CAT-5 unless mobility or distance are a problem. It is useful to use a gigabit to 10/100 switch to avoid a bottleneck at the server. Performance is best when everyone can run at full speed. With thin client, the only bottleneck is likely to be CPU, but only for spikes. It is unlikely that two users will spike at the same time in such a small group, except for boot up or log in. Leave the server run 24/7 and the memory cache will speed up everything.
Any sort of networking goes better with LINUX. IF you are going to use LINUX on the server, unless there is a must-use app that is only available for that other OS, go Linux everywhere. A single Debian repository can be mirrored locally for lightening fast installations.
Not necessarily. A decent PC is 64 bit 3000MHz with 1gb RAM and a few hundred gigabytes of storage. What more does anyone need? This isn't cheap, it is practical. If you want redundancy use software RAID 1 or network a bunch of boxes. If you need more speed, use software RAID 0 or 0+1. Who cares if a few CPU cycles go in the process? I have a system on my desk that serves eight clients as thin terminals. Nine of us use the thing simultaneously and it never bogs down. I use RAID 1 so I have redundancy and two users do not have to wait, but i have so much RAM, the drive light rarely comes on. This system cost $1000. It has 400 gB storage.What advantage would there be to hardware RAID?
Software raid has a role. It is the right thing to do in many cases.
I use OO on a LAN in the high school. Students are the only users besides myself. Staff don't know/don't care and the students love it. It has a mouse and a menu. A school could save big bucks if only thed students converted.
This board has 8 sockets on one Opteron and 4 on the other. If you read the fine print in the manual, you will find you must go down to 266 DDR to use 8 memory modules on the one CPU.
Higher temperatures increase noise levels. Room temperature is about .025 electron volt. 600C is about .075 ev I think silicon carbide or gallium arsenide are suitable semiconductors but they would need to be fabricated at higher temperatures, making precision much more difficult. On the mobo, you would have to insulate or cool all the heat sensitive components in the neighborhood
Put the powerful server in the attic or basement and network to a fanless thin client. You can also try longer video/mouse/keyboard cables if you cannot go fanless.