Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP - Hewlett Packard

This is a discussion on Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP - Hewlett Packard ; Hi, we currently have system runninng on a Sun E280R - 4Gb RAM 2x1.4ghz processors, Solaris 9. This is a web application running Apache and Oracle 9i. We are looking at a new managed service server environment for which the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

  1. Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    Hi, we currently have system runninng on a Sun E280R - 4Gb RAM 2x1.4ghz
    processors, Solaris 9. This is a web application running Apache and
    Oracle 9i.

    We are looking at a new managed service server environment for which the
    provider has suggested 2 HP DL385s - 2 x 2.6Ghz, 8 Gb RAM, Red
    Enterprise Linux.

    Is there any standard benchmark by which I can make a comparison of the
    old and new hardware? Appreciate any pointers.


    --
    jeremy

  2. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    On Sun, 18 Nov 2007, jeremy wrote:

    > We are looking at a new managed service server environment for which the
    > provider has suggested 2 HP DL385s - 2 x 2.6Ghz, 8 Gb RAM, Red
    > Enterprise Linux.


    Hmm, I'd run like hell from any service provider that tried to recommend
    Linux over Solaris--regardless of who made their servers!

    --
    Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member

    CEO,
    My Online Home Inventory

    URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
    http://www.linkedin.com/in/richteer
    http://www.myonlinehomeinventory.com

  3. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    Hi,

    jeremy wrote:
    > Hi, we currently have system runninng on a Sun E280R - 4Gb RAM 2x1.4ghz
    > processors, Solaris 9. This is a web application running Apache and
    > Oracle 9i.
    >
    > We are looking at a new managed service server environment for which the
    > provider has suggested 2 HP DL385s - 2 x 2.6Ghz, 8 Gb RAM, Red
    > Enterprise Linux.
    >
    > Is there any standard benchmark by which I can make a comparison of the
    > old and new hardware? Appreciate any pointers.
    >
    >

    Don't know about benchmark other than
    http://www.sun.com/software/products...benchmarks.xml

    But if you like to compare you should compare a with Solaris 10 and
    Coolstack compiled webtools, not just swap the old 280 for a brand new
    HP and Linux, HP do not have anything else than Linux to sell in that
    range, and I don't think they would prefer Solaris from Sun...

    Coolstack runs on both Sparc and AMD/Intel, also check Suns Txxxx
    Niagara servers, they are made for that kind of load.

    http://cooltools.sunsource.net/coolstack/faq.html

    and you have 60 days free trial from Sun, no charge at all not even
    shipping!

    /michael

  4. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    * Michael Laajanen:

    > But if you like to compare you should compare a with Solaris 10 and
    > Coolstack compiled webtools, not just swap the old 280 for a brand new
    > HP and Linux, HP do not have anything else than Linux to sell in that
    > range, and I don't think they would prefer Solaris from Sun...


    FYI: HP does support Solaris on their ProLiant servers.

    Benjamin

  5. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    Benjamin Gawert wrote:
    > * Michael Laajanen:
    >
    >> But if you like to compare you should compare a with Solaris 10 and
    >> Coolstack compiled webtools, not just swap the old 280 for a brand new
    >> HP and Linux, HP do not have anything else than Linux to sell in that
    >> range, and I don't think they would prefer Solaris from Sun...

    >
    > FYI: HP does support Solaris on their ProLiant servers.
    >
    > Benjamin



    It looks to me like HP does in fact support Solaris on their ProLiant
    servers (although they don't advertise it):

    http://h71028.www7.hp.com/enterprise...0-0-0-121.html


  6. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    "Benjamin Gawert" wrote in message
    news:5qbof9Fv4j1qU1@mid.individual.net...
    >* Michael Laajanen:
    >
    >> But if you like to compare you should compare a with Solaris 10 and
    >> Coolstack compiled webtools, not just swap the old 280 for a brand new HP
    >> and Linux, HP do not have anything else than Linux to sell in that range,
    >> and I don't think they would prefer Solaris from Sun...

    >
    > FYI: HP does support Solaris on their ProLiant servers.


    "Support" yes. Actively sell, no.

    And the level of "support" you receive will be significantly different to
    what Sun will provide.



    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  7. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    * Kilgaard:

    >> FYI: HP does support Solaris on their ProLiant servers.

    >
    > "Support" yes. Actively sell, no.


    Why should HP *sell* an operating system that can be downloaded for free
    from Sun?

    > And the level of "support" you receive will be significantly different to
    > what Sun will provide.


    Well, since Sun is the vendor of the OS (Solaris) and HP only the vendor
    of the hardware it's understandable that the support options for Solaris
    are different.

    Benjamin

  8. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    * Christopher Noyes:

    >> FYI: HP does support Solaris on their ProLiant servers.

    >
    > It looks to me like HP does in fact support Solaris on their ProLiant
    > servers (although they don't advertise it)


    HP lists all operating systems that are supported on a certain system in
    the machine's quickspecs (just search for them via google, i.e.
    "ProLiant ML350 G5 quickspecs").

    Benjamin

  9. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    In comp.sys.sun.hardware jeremy wrote:
    > Hi, we currently have system runninng on a Sun E280R - 4Gb RAM
    > 2x1.4ghz processors, Solaris 9. This is a web application running
    > Apache and Oracle 9i.


    > We are looking at a new managed service server environment for which
    > the provider has suggested 2 HP DL385s - 2 x 2.6Ghz, 8 Gb RAM, Red
    > Enterprise Linux.


    > Is there any standard benchmark by which I can make a comparison of
    > the old and new hardware? Appreciate any pointers.


    Those systems are probably far enough apart in time that the set of
    overlapping "standard benchmark" results between them could be close
    to epsilon. Depends on how old a DL385 is being suggested.

    However, as chance should have it, Sun published some SPECcpu2006
    results for a SunFire 280R albeit with 750 MHz CPUs. I'm not sure if
    HP published any SPECcpu2006 results for that particular config of
    DL385 either, but you might poke around www.spec.org. Both those
    system names have been around long enough there may be some
    SPECcpu2000 numbers as well. It isn't entirely clear from the
    description you provided which of the HP DL 385's was being suggested.

    rick jones
    --
    oxymoron n, Hummer H2 with California Save Our Coasts and Oceans plates
    these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
    feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

  10. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    In comp.sys.hp.hardware Rick Jones wrote:
    > In comp.sys.sun.hardware jeremy wrote:
    >> Hi, we currently have system runninng on a Sun E280R - 4Gb RAM
    >> 2x1.4ghz processors, Solaris 9. This is a web application running
    >> Apache and Oracle 9i.

    >
    >> We are looking at a new managed service server environment for which
    >> the provider has suggested 2 HP DL385s - 2 x 2.6Ghz, 8 Gb RAM, Red
    >> Enterprise Linux.

    >
    >> Is there any standard benchmark by which I can make a comparison of
    >> the old and new hardware? Appreciate any pointers.

    >
    > Those systems are probably far enough apart in time that the set of
    > overlapping "standard benchmark" results between them could be close
    > to epsilon. Depends on how old a DL385 is being suggested.
    >
    > However, as chance should have it, Sun published some SPECcpu2006
    > results for a SunFire 280R albeit with 750 MHz CPUs. I'm not sure if
    > HP published any SPECcpu2006 results for that particular config of
    > DL385 either, but you might poke around www.spec.org. Both those
    > system names have been around long enough there may be some
    > SPECcpu2000 numbers as well. It isn't entirely clear from the
    > description you provided which of the HP DL 385's was being suggested.


    dl385 aren't that old. They're HPs answer to cheap opteron
    processors in a standard DL380 looking case, but made to a lower standard.

    Why did I say they're not made as well as the normal Dl380s? That's what a
    few service techs told me that fix those machines all day.

    Either way, any dl385 will be faster than a sunfire 280r.

    HP doesn't care if you run Solaris on their x86 machines, and it does run
    well on them, but don't expect much help from them unless you have a clear
    hardware problem.

    That's the advantage of solaris on sun hardware- you have a single place
    to call when you have problems, vs. two vendors blaming each other for
    everything.

    Advantages of a Dl385 are it's not EOLed, they ship with 3 year
    warranties, and you can shove 6 drives in the thing, plus it has embedded
    hardware RAID (that works under solaris). so instead of playing disk
    suite, you can must mirror disks and swap them anytime, AND is has ILO, so
    you never lose that out of band management, not to mention you can license
    virtual media etc.







  11. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    Cydrome Leader wrote:
    >Advantages of a Dl385 are it's not EOLed,


    it is EOL: DL385G1 was retired 28th, Feb 2007.

    Cu
    JAn
    --
    wings and claws

  12. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    On Nov 20, 4:20 pm, Jan van Beers wrote:
    > Cydrome Leader wrote:
    > >Advantages of a Dl385 are it's not EOLed,

    >
    > it is EOL: DL385G1 was retired 28th, Feb 2007.
    >


    DL385 G2 is being proposed to me.

    --
    jeremy

  13. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    * Cydrome Leader:

    > dl385 aren't that old.


    Depends on which generation we're talking about.

    > They're HPs answer to cheap opteron
    > processors in a standard DL380 looking case, but made to a lower standard.
    >
    > Why did I say they're not made as well as the normal Dl380s? That's what a
    > few service techs told me that fix those machines all day.


    I don't know how they come to the idea that the DL385 (G1 and G2) were
    made to a lower standard because that's just plain stupid. The quality
    of the DL385 is at the same level as the other DL machines, we have a
    few hundred of them in our datacenters and they are just as reliable as
    other ProLiants.

    BTW: why do you thin the DL385 is cheap? If you look at the prices
    you'll notice that the DL385 G1 was and the DL385 G2 is around the same
    or even more expensive than comparable intel machines.

    > Either way, any dl385 will be faster than a sunfire 280r.
    >
    > HP doesn't care if you run Solaris on their x86 machines, and it does run
    > well on them, but don't expect much help from them unless you have a clear
    > hardware problem.


    Support is not limited to defective hardware. "Supported" means that the
    OS runs on the server and that HP supports the HP-developed Solaris
    drivers. They don't do application support (but that's usually an ISV
    thing) and they won't do support for Solaris itself (that's where Sun
    comes in).

    > Advantages of a Dl385 are it's not EOLed


    The DL385 G1 is EOL'd. G2 is not.

    Benjamin

  14. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    In comp.sys.hp.hardware Benjamin Gawert wrote:
    > * Cydrome Leader:
    >
    >> dl385 aren't that old.

    >
    > Depends on which generation we're talking about.
    >
    >> They're HPs answer to cheap opteron
    >> processors in a standard DL380 looking case, but made to a lower standard.
    >>
    >> Why did I say they're not made as well as the normal Dl380s? That's what a
    >> few service techs told me that fix those machines all day.

    >
    > I don't know how they come to the idea that the DL385 (G1 and G2) were
    > made to a lower standard because that's just plain stupid. The quality
    > of the DL385 is at the same level as the other DL machines, we have a
    > few hundred of them in our datacenters and they are just as reliable as
    > other ProLiants.


    I'll go with what the service techs say about the machines they service
    daily. For every hundreds of machines you have running daily, they have a
    dozen broken machines to examine and repair.

    DL140s carry the "proliant" badge, and there's nothing server at
    all about them. They even boot up some junior BIOS that looks OEMed
    from a knock off chinese motherboard. Not all proliants are the same.

    That opteron suffix "5" series was made to be cheaper, and that's what HP
    did with them.

    > BTW: why do you thin the DL385 is cheap? If you look at the prices
    > you'll notice that the DL385 G1 was and the DL385 G2 is around the same
    > or even more expensive than comparable intel machines.
    >
    >> Either way, any dl385 will be faster than a sunfire 280r.
    >>
    >> HP doesn't care if you run Solaris on their x86 machines, and it does run
    >> well on them, but don't expect much help from them unless you have a clear
    >> hardware problem.

    >
    > Support is not limited to defective hardware. "Supported" means that the
    > OS runs on the server and that HP supports the HP-developed Solaris
    > drivers. They don't do application support (but that's usually an ISV


    just try it. Make a solaris 10 machine panic, then call HP and demand
    help. Be sure to offer them your crash files for analysis as well.

    > thing) and they won't do support for Solaris itself (that's where Sun
    > comes in).
    >
    >> Advantages of a Dl385 are it's not EOLed

    >
    > The DL385 G1 is EOL'd. G2 is not.
    >
    > Benjamin



  15. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    jeremy wrote:
    >On Nov 20, 4:20 pm, Jan van Beers wrote:
    >> Cydrome Leader wrote:
    >> >Advantages of a Dl385 are it's not EOLed,

    >>
    >> it is EOL: DL385G1 was retired 28th, Feb 2007.

    >
    >DL385 G2 is being proposed to me.


    These should drop in price around January, when HP -finally/hopefully-
    rolls out quad core 385s.
    anyway: a 385G2 should be at least twice as fast as a 280R *IF* your
    current machine really needs the CPU power/memory. Otherwise it just
    gains a few percent from better I/O (SCSI and GBeth) and can idle a
    bit faster

    Cu
    Jan
    --
    wings and claws

  16. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    * Cydrome Leader:

    >> I don't know how they come to the idea that the DL385 (G1 and G2) were
    >> made to a lower standard because that's just plain stupid. The quality
    >> of the DL385 is at the same level as the other DL machines, we have a
    >> few hundred of them in our datacenters and they are just as reliable as
    >> other ProLiants.

    >
    > I'll go with what the service techs say about the machines they service
    > daily. For every hundreds of machines you have running daily, they have a
    > dozen broken machines to examine and repair.


    Yeah, right. But being a multinational company with mostly HP gear we
    really have a very good connection to HP, and it's strange that none of
    their engineers knows anything about the DL385 being made after a lower
    quality than their intel counterparts or about a higher failure rate,
    and I couldn't find even a slight evidence about that on the net.

    And also knowing about the sometimes questionable competence of service
    technicians especially of subcontractors I tend to believe my own
    experience and what I know from HP. They made the machines so I assume
    they should know it best.

    > DL140s carry the "proliant" badge, and there's nothing server at
    > all about them. They even boot up some junior BIOS that looks OEMed
    > from a knock off chinese motherboard. Not all proliants are the same.


    It's an open secret for everyone who knows a bot about the ProLiant
    servers that the 1xx series (ML/DL) is a entry level series which uses
    generic OEM boards and is aimed at the price sensitive market. The 1xx
    lacks things like the standard ProLiant RBSU, integrated ILO and only
    comes with 1yr warranty. Of course the 1xx series is of lower quality
    than the other ProLiants. But that's in no way different than entry
    level servers from Dell or other manufacturers.

    > That opteron suffix "5" series was made to be cheaper, and that's what HP
    > did with them.


    Did your techs also told you that nonsense? FYI: the suffix "5" tells
    you that this is an AMD based machine while the intel based system have
    the suffix "0". Very simple scheme which has *zero* to do with quality.
    But a short look at the HP website would have told you that already.

    >> Support is not limited to defective hardware. "Supported" means that the
    >> OS runs on the server and that HP supports the HP-developed Solaris
    >> drivers. They don't do application support (but that's usually an ISV

    >
    > just try it. Make a solaris 10 machine panic, then call HP and demand
    > help. Be sure to offer them your crash files for analysis as well.


    Since we don't use Solaris any more that's not possible. However I know
    from some of our business partners who do use Solaris that this works.
    For example one of them had problems with a Smart Array 6404 controller
    in a ProLiant ML570 G3 where SCSI devices weren't visible any more if
    SAS devices are connected to the P800 controller. The support had a look
    at it and found that it was the combination of an outdated driver and
    old firmware on the SA6404. They fixed the problem by updating the
    driver and the controller firmware.

    Benjamin

  17. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    In comp.sys.sun.hardware Benjamin Gawert wrote:
    > * Cydrome Leader:
    >
    >>> I don't know how they come to the idea that the DL385 (G1 and G2) were
    >>> made to a lower standard because that's just plain stupid. The quality
    >>> of the DL385 is at the same level as the other DL machines, we have a
    >>> few hundred of them in our datacenters and they are just as reliable as
    >>> other ProLiants.

    >>
    >> I'll go with what the service techs say about the machines they service
    >> daily. For every hundreds of machines you have running daily, they have a
    >> dozen broken machines to examine and repair.

    >
    > Yeah, right. But being a multinational company with mostly HP gear we
    > really have a very good connection to HP, and it's strange that none of
    > their engineers knows anything about the DL385 being made after a lower
    > quality than their intel counterparts or about a higher failure rate,
    > and I couldn't find even a slight evidence about that on the net.
    >
    > And also knowing about the sometimes questionable competence of service
    > technicians especially of subcontractors I tend to believe my own
    > experience and what I know from HP. They made the machines so I assume
    > they should know it best.
    >
    >> DL140s carry the "proliant" badge, and there's nothing server at
    >> all about them. They even boot up some junior BIOS that looks OEMed
    >> from a knock off chinese motherboard. Not all proliants are the same.

    >
    > It's an open secret for everyone who knows a bot about the ProLiant
    > servers that the 1xx series (ML/DL) is a entry level series which uses
    > generic OEM boards and is aimed at the price sensitive market. The 1xx


    like the opterons systems, price first, everything else last.

    > lacks things like the standard ProLiant RBSU, integrated ILO and only
    > comes with 1yr warranty. Of course the 1xx series is of lower quality
    > than the other ProLiants. But that's in no way different than entry
    > level servers from Dell or other manufacturers.
    >
    >> That opteron suffix "5" series was made to be cheaper, and that's what HP
    >> did with them.

    >
    > Did your techs also told you that nonsense? FYI: the suffix "5" tells
    > you that this is an AMD based machine while the intel based system have
    > the suffix "0". Very simple scheme which has *zero* to do with quality.


    yup, nothing at all. HP got bored and wanted to make a nearly parallel
    series of systems, because they had nothing better to do.

    > But a short look at the HP website would have told you that already.


    The dell website told me they make the best servers I can get. I have to
    take their word for it.

    >>> Support is not limited to defective hardware. "Supported" means that the
    >>> OS runs on the server and that HP supports the HP-developed Solaris
    >>> drivers. They don't do application support (but that's usually an ISV

    >>
    >> just try it. Make a solaris 10 machine panic, then call HP and demand
    >> help. Be sure to offer them your crash files for analysis as well.

    >
    > Since we don't use Solaris any more that's not possible. However I know
    > from some of our business partners who do use Solaris that this works.


    wow, a "business partner, they must be sham service tech company. Why
    would I take their word for anything? sheesh. Read below.

    They're clearly pretty junior if they're running outdated drivers and
    firmware left and right, then have to beg for help to boot a firmware
    maintenance CD, and maybe download a file off the HP site.

    That's amateur, and I'd drop any such place as "business partner" real
    fast, since they clearly don't know solaris or HP servers.

    > For example one of them had problems with a Smart Array 6404 controller
    > in a ProLiant ML570 G3 where SCSI devices weren't visible any more if
    > SAS devices are connected to the P800 controller. The support had a look
    > at it and found that it was the combination of an outdated driver and
    > old firmware on the SA6404. They fixed the problem by updating the
    > driver and the controller firmware.


  18. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    * Cydrome Leader:

    >> It's an open secret for everyone who knows a bot about the ProLiant
    >> servers that the 1xx series (ML/DL) is a entry level series which uses
    >> generic OEM boards and is aimed at the price sensitive market. The 1xx

    >
    > like the opterons systems, price first, everything else last.


    Repeating the same BS again doesn't make it true. But since you seem to
    know more than the rest of the world you certainly can enlighten us and
    name exact details where the AMD-based ProLiants are made to a lower
    standard than the intel ProLiants, right?

    BTW: the HP AMD-based machines are not cheaper than their intel
    counterparts, so your argument about "price first" is just silly.

    >> Did your techs also told you that nonsense? FYI: the suffix "5" tells
    >> you that this is an AMD based machine while the intel based system have
    >> the suffix "0". Very simple scheme which has *zero* to do with quality.

    >
    > yup, nothing at all. HP got bored and wanted to make a nearly parallel
    > series of systems, because they had nothing better to do.


    This might be your impression. But for people that know a bit about IT
    it's well known that AMD-based systems have different weaknesses and
    strengths than intel-based machines. At the time the DL385 G1 was
    current intel still was selling their slow and hot Netburst-based XEON
    frying pans while AMD ran circles around them. Even today with the fast
    Core2-based XEONs the AMD-based systems still have their place.

    Besides that: the fact that HP is very successful with it's server
    products they probably know a bit more about the market for nearly
    parralel AMD and intel systems much better than you. They probably do
    something right.

    And a short look on the Dell and IBM website would have shoed you that
    HP is not the only vendor with parallels in their AMD and intel product
    range. Even Sun has AMD and intel as parralel products. Ever thought
    that there must be a reason for that? I don't think so.

    >> But a short look at the HP website would have told you that already.

    >
    > The dell website told me they make the best servers I can get. I have to
    > take their word for it.


    Maybe. But still doesn't change the fact that you blindly bought into a
    pile of bull**** when a simple look on the HP website would have showed
    you reality.

    >>>> Support is not limited to defective hardware. "Supported" means that the
    >>>> OS runs on the server and that HP supports the HP-developed Solaris
    >>>> drivers. They don't do application support (but that's usually an ISV
    >>> just try it. Make a solaris 10 machine panic, then call HP and demand
    >>> help. Be sure to offer them your crash files for analysis as well.

    >> Since we don't use Solaris any more that's not possible. However I know
    >> from some of our business partners who do use Solaris that this works.

    >
    > wow, a "business partner, they must be sham service tech company. Why
    > would I take their word for anything?


    I know that you only take the word of your two all-knowing "techs". But
    honestly I don't give a **** on whom you believe as the facts are there
    and can be proofed by anyone who's interested.

    > sheesh. Read below.
    >
    > They're clearly pretty junior if they're running outdated drivers and
    > firmware left and right, then have to beg for help to boot a firmware
    > maintenance CD, and maybe download a file off the HP site.
    >
    > That's amateur, and I'd drop any such place as "business partner" real
    > fast, since they clearly don't know solaris or HP servers.


    You're very fast with your mouth but your brain obviously has problems
    following. First, you don't know **** about what business we're in with
    them (hint: it's not servers but something especially your country
    heavily depends). Second, the driver and firmware they had problems with
    were the latest one downloadable from the HP website. The reason for the
    problem was that they were using a hardware combination that is
    extremely rare and that there was a problem with the combination of this
    hardware, the driver and the controller firmware. Since they already had
    the latest firmware and drivers from the website they called HP simply
    that's because they have a service contract for. HP looked into the
    problem and fixed that with internal driver releases and firmware.

    And as you speaking about "amateur" I really think it's better you keep
    quiet in that regard as you even don't get the very basic facts right.
    Maybe the "techs" that told you all this nonsense are just idiots, or
    maybe they are not but are still naking fun because they found someone
    ignorant enough to buy even the greatest nonsense from them. Which one
    is right I don't care. But you brabbling about how cheap ProLiant
    Opteron servers are made while even not able to get even the simple
    product numbers right (forget about other facts) is something that I'm
    sure qualifies as "amateur" - and honestly, that's just very mildly said.

    Benjamin

  19. Re: Comparing hardware / Sun vs HP

    In comp.sys.hp.hardware Benjamin Gawert wrote:
    > * Cydrome Leader:
    >
    >>> It's an open secret for everyone who knows a bot about the ProLiant
    >>> servers that the 1xx series (ML/DL) is a entry level series which uses
    >>> generic OEM boards and is aimed at the price sensitive market. The 1xx


    [crap cut]

    > You're very fast with your mouth but your brain obviously has problems
    > following. First, you don't know **** about what business we're in with
    > them (hint: it's not servers but something especially your country


    So let me get this straight-

    - your business has nothing to do with servers
    - your "business partners" don't know what a firmware maintenance CD or
    updated drivers are
    - they're also running "rare" combinations of mainstream HP hardware

    AND

    - you're going to school me on server reliability.

    Good one.


+ Reply to Thread