r15k wrote:
> hi,
> could be just waffle, but this is from:
>
> http://www.top500.org/ORSC/2003/comes.html#comes
>
>> A development that has shown to be of significance is the
>> introduction of Intel's IA-64 Itanium processor family. Already four
>> vendors are offering Itanium 2-based systems at the moment and it is
>> known that HP will end the marketing of its Alpha and PA-RISC based
>> systems in favour of the Itanium processor family. At the same time
>> SGI will stop the further development of MIPS processor based
>> machines. This means that in a few years only AMD, IBM, Intel, and
>> SUN will produce RISC-like processors for HPC systems.
>
>
> gloomy ?
>
> r15k

Alexis is trying to give us some hope by overclocking R16k
and a never seen processor with 1GHz clock,
but is definatelly dead of SGI
EVERY devolper run away from IRIX platform -even DiscreetLogic...
+ selling Alias...
+ politics : over 8k$ for compilators, multipling price of supprt etc
etc etc

so bye bye sgi

btw
is it possible to sue sgi for distroying itsown ?
joke

Tom Kranz wrote:
>
> comp.sys.peecee.fanboys is that way ---->
>
> <----- that way for comp.sys.linux.12yearold.friendless.nerd
>
> I wish it were possible to sue parents for spawning defective
> offspring.
>
> Definitely *not* a joke.

this one has my vote for post of the year. right on, tom.

cheers

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
cosmos See no linux
@ Hear no linux
hepcat.org Speak no linux
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

tom@siliconbunny.com (Tom Kranz) writes:

> - the fact that SGI have been able to take the Origin 3000 and tweak
> the CPU bricks to fit Itaniums should tell you something about the
> design. The world "modular" would feature highly in most sentient
> people's minds at this point. This should also give the clued an
> indication that SGI are more than able to shoehorn in different CPUs,
> given the market demand.

I don't think "tweak" is the right word, the NUMAflex architecture
behind the Origin 3000 was designed to accomodate both MIPS and IPF
from the word go AFAIK. I agree with your other points though.

*p

nicte wrote:

czesc chuj!

> all sgi users has been waiting for new processor since R10k
> it's a little loong time
> all the time hearing wait for next N2, N20, N2000
>

what does it matter to you as you are not obviously going to purchase
any new processor from sgi but instead just continue to bitch, whine,
and moan about how it costs too much.


> you bought them, did you?

sure did, and my support contract as well.

> you are a rich man but I'm not jealous

glad to hear, hows the weather in poland?

> what interesting did you produce ?

we are working on the TUXCRUSHER network suite. instantly identify
and remove linux from your companies network once and for all. stay tuned.

> next version of "Hello World" with antialiased icon on desktop?

sounds like a GNU project to me.

> well, now I'm jealous !
>

smashing!

> Yes I really should buy something from SGI, maybe a screwdriver for a
> 5k$ with support for next 3995 $ / year?
> yeah bid deal indeed

maybe you should take your pasty ass to another newsgroup since you
obviously do not intend to purchase, use, or contribute anything besides
incessant complaints that everything costs too much.

Another fine poster boy for the Open Source movement. They must be proud.

cheers.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
cosmos See no linux
@ Hear no linux
hepcat.org Speak no linux
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Tom Kranz wrote:
> nicte wrote in message news:...
>
>>>- R16K is getting, and will continue to get, speed bumps. This is not
>>>overclocking, this is not a desperate grab by SGI to squeeze a last
>>>few $$ out of a dying market - this is a perfectly normal evolution of
>>>a CPU
>>
>>indeed, mix of perfectly abnormal evolution with unperfect marketing
>
>
> Obviously I am an intellectual weakling, as your reasoning here
> escapes me.
>
> In what way is regular speed increases to a CPU "abnormal evolution"?
>
100MHz increase by year ? yes it's abnormal like for SGI
no significant changes in architecture since 1996, maybe in R18k, which
is dropped as we know
no mentio about any new graphics pipes

> In what way is producing faster CPUs for customers who want faster
> CPUs "unperfect marketing"?
>
like above + astro-pricelist + fatal support
yes it's unperfect for sure
>
>>all sgi users has been waiting for new processor since R10k
>>it's a little loong time
>>all the time hearing wait for next N2, N20, N2000
>
>
> I'm afraid you miss the point, my vacuous friend. "All sgi users" have
> had new CPUs since R10k. SGI have evolved the R10k design to increase
> performance and scaleability.
>
nice performance -2,5 times slower than Itanium, really nice indeed
but price is many many times higher
no surprice that one by one companies exchange their hardware and
software to wintel ****
>
> As a vocal yet mentally limited bystander, you are unaware of what SGI
> are doing. You have bought nothing from them, and never will, because
> you percieve SGI's products as being valueless.
>
Well as a customer I'd like to run the software made for SGI
but, you know, a reasonably recent software...
not old versions from 1996,
in nowadays you can fiond a soft for IRIX mostly in dropped platforms
section
And it's not my opinion but opinion of soft makers
Even Discreel Logic has started moving to Linux -very very sad
one of the last bastions surrendered

> Therefore, from your limited point of view, SGI have stagnated and
> will soon die.
>
well, we'll see


cheers !

> Another fine poster boy for the Open Source movement. They must be proud.

Hey! I quite like some of the OpenSource and GNU stuff.

On 20 Feb 2004 10:00:17 -0800, Jonathan wrote:
>> Another fine poster boy for the Open Source movement. They must be proud.
> Hey! I quite like some of the OpenSource and GNU stuff.

And actually OpenSource stuff is what can make older SGIs useful
at home. Can't be that wrong if at least some people try to learn
how to use the platform, right?



Gerhard
[N.P.: Deep Purple - Child in Time]

Gerhard Lenerz wrote:
> On 20 Feb 2004 10:00:17 -0800, Jonathan wrote:
>>> Another fine poster boy for the Open Source movement. They must be proud.
>> Hey! I quite like some of the OpenSource and GNU stuff.
>
> And actually OpenSource stuff is what can make older SGIs useful
> at home. Can't be that wrong if at least some people try to learn
> how to use the platform, right?
>

the point of the argument here is most open source users tend to
have a big mouth complaining about why sgi sucks or crying foul over
monetary costs involved in certain arenas of sgi use vs peecees.

perhaps if they spent more time contributing to the open source projects
they endlessly tout as the One True Way instead of bitching it would
actually be a more viable option.

as for me, some open source projects do carry value and the ability to
integrate them into a working environment is key to any platform but the
majority still leave you standing in the bread line when it comes down to it.

relying on average joe working on software in his spare time is not a
valid business model and never will be.

cheers.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
cosmos See no linux
@ Hear no linux
hepcat.org Speak no linux
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

have to agree the opensource stuff is gr8.

mplayer kicks ass. Lets not forget Vim and nVi

*********************
Khalid Schofield
System Administrator / EM Technician
Dept. Of Materials
University Of Oxford
Parks Road
Oxford
OX1 3PH

Email: khalid.schofield@materials.ox.ac.uk
Tel: 01865 273785
Fax: 01865 283333
Web: http://www-em.materials.ox.ac.uk/peo...eld/index.html


On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Gerhard Lenerz wrote:

> On 20 Feb 2004 10:00:17 -0800, Jonathan wrote:
> >> Another fine poster boy for the Open Source movement. They must be proud.
> > Hey! I quite like some of the OpenSource and GNU stuff.
>
> And actually OpenSource stuff is what can make older SGIs useful
> at home. Can't be that wrong if at least some people try to learn
> how to use the platform, right?
>
>
>
> Gerhard
> [N.P.: Deep Purple - Child in Time]
>

nicte wrote in message news:...
> Tom Kranz wrote:
> > Obviously I am an intellectual weakling, as your reasoning here
> > escapes me.
> >
> > In what way is regular speed increases to a CPU "abnormal evolution"?
> >
> 100MHz increase by year ? yes it's abnormal like for SGI
> no significant changes in architecture since 1996,

Ah, I see your problem - beyond that of being mentally incapacitated.

Just because a MIPS CPU has a low clock speed does not mean it is not
a fast CPU.

A 3.2GHz clock speed means nothing if the CPU is idle the bulk of the
time due to bottlenecks in the rest of the architecture.

This is so mind-numbingly obvious that I cannot believe you are
unaware of this.

If you think clock speed defines how fast a machine is, why on earth
do you have an SGI machine?

In fact - *do* you even have an SGI? Do you even understand the most
basic ideas that have gone into their design?

Or are you one of the countless PC using imbeciles who bought an SGI
because it "was cool", and are now whining because the clock speed is
lower than a PC toy, or you can't run games, or 2D apps suck?

> maybe in R18k, which
> is dropped as we know
> no mentio about any new graphics pipes

My God! Are you blind? Were you beaten as a child? Did you mother
repeatedly drop you on your head? Please, come out of your cave,
Troglodyte boy - wake up, it's 2004!

R18K is nothing but a name that people OUTSIDE of SGI have tagged onto
the next generation CPU.

It may or may not be called R18K, but it certainly has not been
dropped - as has been pointed out countless times by people who
actually have visibility of this.

And, as has been pointed out countless times, you DO NOT have
visibility of this because you are a whining nobody who has bought
nothing from SGI.

And addressing your other fatuous statement:

In what way does the Onyx4 have "no new graphics pipes"? Or Tezro?

In what way is an efficient, dual core MIPS CPU not a "significant
change in architecture"?

Do you even understand what these things are?

>
> > In what way is producing faster CPUs for customers who want faster
> > CPUs "unperfect marketing"?
> >
> like above + astro-pricelist + fatal support
> yes it's unperfect for sure

How would you know?

Have you ever bought anything from SGI?

Have you bought their support?

Have you had to use their kit and support in a business-critical
environment?

Of course not - you are a whiny ignorant PC user who bought a 2nd hand
SGI, and you now think SGI owe you something - because, hey, you can
get Linux for free, so why can't SGI give all their good stuff away
for *nothing*?

You utter imbecile. My word, your parents must live in daily shame,
shattered with the knowledge that they brought someone so incapable of
independant thought into the world.

I have bought equipment from SGI, I have bought their support, and I
have used it in business-critical environments.

Their kit did what it needed to do, and their support was excellent.

If you buy SGI kit for the wrong reasons and use it for the wrong
applications, whose fault is that? SGIs? Or yours, as the idiot who
thought that something expensive and cool looking would fulfill any
need?

> nice performance -2,5 times slower than Itanium, really nice indeed
> but price is many many times higher
> no surprice that one by one companies exchange their hardware and
> software to wintel ****

I have, and will continue to, pay that higher price, because there are
situations where SGI kit will do what no-one elses will.

Which does not make the price high - it makes it a bargain. Not that I
expect someone as mentally inferior as yourself to understand
something so basic and fundamental.

Who cares if Itanium is faster on a meaningless benchmark, which bears
no relation to real-world application load?

Ah - I forget. Vacuous loud mouths like yourself who have never had to
use this stuff for a business, and who think SPEC marks and Quake FPS
figures are somehow a real measure of how a system will perform for
your application and workload.

> >
> > As a vocal yet mentally limited bystander, you are unaware of what SGI
> > are doing. You have bought nothing from them, and never will, because
> > you percieve SGI's products as being valueless.
> >
> Well as a customer I'd like to run the software made for SGI
> but, you know, a reasonably recent software...

A customer?

*Really*?

And which system have you bought from SGI? Which support contract? Who
was the salesman you spoke to? Who is your account manager?

You have bought nothing from SGI. You feel that SGI owe you something
because you bought one of their old systems, second hand.

> not old versions from 1996,
> in nowadays you can fiond a soft for IRIX mostly in dropped platforms
> section
> And it's not my opinion but opinion of soft makers
> Even Discreel Logic has started moving to Linux -very very sad
> one of the last bastions surrendered

Discrete have brought out a version of their software to support a
new, low cost, limited capability platform.

That is basic business sense - basic common sense even. Something you
appear to have a fatal lack of.

In what way does that mean that SGI will die? Because Discrete add
support for another platform - a platform that Discrete will openly
acknowledge is not as capable as IRIX - mean that SGI is doomed?

Discrete's software on IRIX is capable of far more than similar
software running on Linux.

If that is of value to a studio, they will pay the higher price. That
higher initial cost will help them achieve profits that they would not
have achieved using another solution.

That is of benefit to them.

I think it is telling that the only people who whine on comp.sys.sgi
about the high price of SGI systems and the software they run are
people who do not have to make a living from them.

Why does a business owe you something, when you produce nothing for
them?

And spare me that crap about University students coming into business
and recommending Linux instead of SGI, or not knowing about SGI.

That is utter toss, spouted by people with no business experience at
all.

To believe that new hires with no experience can somehow affect the
technology and infrastructure decisions of a business is blinkered,
wishfull thinking of the worst sort.

Maybe one day when you grow up and have to work for a living you will
find this out for yourself.

Cheers,
TOM

tom@siliconbunny.com (Tom Kranz) wrote in message news:<858768d8.0402210329.3e76028e@posting.google.com>...
> And spare me that crap about University students coming into business
> and recommending Linux instead of SGI, or not knowing about SGI.
>
> That is utter toss, spouted by people with no business experience at
> all.
>
> To believe that new hires with no experience can somehow affect the
> technology and infrastructure decisions of a business is blinkered,
> wishfull thinking of the worst sort.
>

Probably should leave well enough alone, but ah well. This is one area
I have to disagree with. The GIS market as an example, is largely
dominated by ESRI today because they courted the academic crowd.

I'm not saying that new kids out of college will always influence what
technologies a buisness will use, but it can and does happen.

You really should write this up into an opinion piece for your site.
Some very nice points.

Cheers,

Shawn

joe smith wrote:

>
> Seek help, sir. And by the way, it's a fact that CPU against CPU, the lates
> IA32, IA32E and AMD64 based processors are a lot faster than anything MIPS
> can throw to compete with them,
Actually, R14K CPUs are very fast, I have used Pro/Engineer on a dual
700MHz Fuel, it's just as fast as a dual 2.8GHz Dell Xeon workstation or
a dual 900MHz Sun Blade 2000.
You can also see from the benchmark test from www.zoorender.com
Neil Rudzinsk has provided the rendering time from a Tezro, it's
comparable to any PC based machine when using software rendering, it's
faster than PCs when using Mental Ray.

MIPS stuff will be eaten for breakfast. That
> must be quite a bitter fact to swallow reading your reaction above.
>
> Okay, I'll bite. Since SPEC and Quake FPS figures are not relevant, but the
> workload of your application.. then SGI is good for you. Fine. But for most
> visualization tasks such as running Maya 5.0, Lightwave, Softimage..
Check on WETA's or LOTR's site, you will notice the modeling and most of
the animation are still done on SGI's MIPS workstations rather than PC.

IA64 or
> AMD64 based system will be a lot better with workstation class accelerator
> from 3DLabs (Wildcat XP's are quite good), Quadro series from NV or similiar
> will be a lot faster, and economical choise for modeling.
Just don't use hardware rendering, besides, how many studio use their
workstation to render? one thing for sure,
Maya 4.5 + dual 2.8GHz Xeon PC + ATI Radeon FireGL X1 + RedHat 9.0 =
reboot after 6 hours of use, with Windows 2000 you would need to reboot
more often.
Maya 4.5 + dual 400MHz Octane 2 + V10Pro + Irix 6.5.16 = 10~15% slower
response when using Polygon, not much different when using NURBS, but
with weeks of uptime.

>
> And when the workload is *rendering*, a lot of high-profile companies have
> moved into Linux based renderfarms. WETA is a good recent example. It's a
> shame to admit, but the SGI is a fading star.. but this doesn't mean I don't
> like their systems, architechture and so on.
>
Same as Pixar, they used to use Sun as their renderfarm and moved to x86
blade servers from RakeSaver few year ago, and "I think" still use SGI
MIPS as graphical workstation, now considering who owns Pixar, shouldn't
people be saying Apple is the one who is fading?

One thing I will agree is that the price tag on SGI workstations are too
high, personally I wouldn't mind paying 20% more than same class x86
workstation, but definitely not the current rate.

S.Chang

In article ,
"S.Chang" wrote:

: I have used Pro/Engineer on a dual
: 700MHz Fuel

That would be a cute trick, considering the Fuel is single-cpu only.


Cheers - Tony 'Nicoya' Mantler

--
Tony 'Nicoya' Mantler -- Master of Code-fu -- nicoya@ubb.ca
-- http://nicoya.feline.pp.se/ -- http://www.ubb.ca/ --

Tony 'Nicoya' Mantler wrote:
> In article ,
> "S.Chang" wrote:
>
> : I have used Pro/Engineer on a dual
> : 700MHz Fuel
>
> That would be a cute trick, considering the Fuel is single-cpu only.
>
>
> Cheers - Tony 'Nicoya' Mantler
>
Doh! forgot to delete the "dual" part, was comparing a dual 550MHz
Octane with the rest but remembered the Fuel in Mech Eng is the faster
machine.

S.Chang

> One thing I will agree is that the price tag on SGI workstations are too
> high, personally I wouldn't mind paying 20% more than same class x86
> workstation, but definitely not the current rate.

I agree with you, and I do adore SGI hardware. I would go as far as pay
nearly double the premium, but it's still higher that's ridiculous already.
Luckily I am not doing business where I *must* have SGI workstation, but I
would *prefer* to do the work on one given half the choise. Actually at this
time I am writing Windows software for Bill Gates OS. It's not fun, but it's
work and I kind of like programming regarless of the platform. Some are
nicer than others.

Some languages I don't like. That's more relevant to my tastes, which
however, is unimportant trivial by itself. Zealots who swear by one brand
and "all others suck" make me sick, no matter what the brand or niche
happens to be at the time. If it's Windows user who claims that UNIX, Linux,
IRIX, MacOS X, etc. "suck" just for not being windows, or the opposite, or
any possible combination we could fathom .. that's something that I react
strongly for, which is kind of stupid since it's waste of time to argue
about opinions and even when at intellectual level realize it, the will is
weak and should really use my time more constructively. It would save yours
aswell, so that you wouldn't have to reply to my pointless posts..

But as long as no one is personally insulted, it's all for fun.. atleast
that's how I hope you all reading this take my posts (I am pseudo-trolling
in that sense, seriousness is not really the motivation for me, but to
participate and hopefully entertain, even if it cracks some of you up or
give you pleasure to see how stupid posts I can sometimes make). That's how
I generally see the Usenet as.. place where people with similiar interests
can participate in discussion. I try to keep out of the way of 'serious'
debate where someone actually has a problem and really wants help. Let's
just hope that I recognize such threads and stay out. ;-)

MIPS isn´t dead!

> And spare me that crap about University students coming into business
> and recommending Linux instead of SGI, or not knowing about SGI.
>
> That is utter toss, spouted by people with no business experience at
> all.
>
> To believe that new hires with no experience can somehow affect the
> technology and infrastructure decisions of a business is blinkered,
> wishfull thinking of the worst sort.

I would be careful about predicting these things. Personally, I think it
is very important that people in the University environment are familiar
with SGI. Why do you think all computercompanies always have discounts
for Universities? For fun? To show that they are not evil?

>MIPS has traditionally even
>better IPC, however, lately they have been (IMHO) slow in coming up with
>competitive processors for 1-2 processor systems. Even if a supercomputer is
>ran, there is a need for (relatively) cheap workstation class systems, where
>you can develop software for the more expensive systems.

Agree! I have asked people in the comp.sys.sgi.* groups before why
MIPS/SGI haven´t produced two different lines of CPU´s. One line that is
very energyefficient which can then be densely packed in
Servers/ComputingMonsters and one line that can be packed into
desktops/desksides like Octane and Tezro. This second line of more
processors could be made less eneryefficient and instead focus on making
1-4 processor machines capable to beat Sun, AMD and Intel, performance
and also performance/price wise! Even if it means that SGI would need a
4 proc. machine to beat an AMD offering in the performance/price
category.
How many of you would buy a SGI box at 3k USD? Very many of you, and not
only us SGI-diehards. People who count every penny and dime, businesses,
universities... SGI could jump in and do a profit based on more (more,
not mass-market) units sold while not competing directly with the
PC-crowd, since the SGI product still would have a quality way beyond
PC. Not just quality measured in quality parts and construction. But
they could offer a machine that is tested and confirmed to be stable
with a stable OS. I am referring to the problem that not only is MS XP a
sadly coded product, it has to cope with a myriad of bad hardware
aswell.

SGI needs desktops that can compete with desktop offerings of SUN, Apple
and others. While not beeing capable to compete with the Fuel graphics
and I/O wise, the Dual 2Ghz G5 shure can compete with a Fuel when it
comes down to calculations. Those University researchers also only need
to shell out 3k USD for such a machine. At our University they still (at
least last time i checked) do work with indy´s and Indigo2´s as frontend
and a Challenge XL with R10k´s to do the numbercrunching. I bet this
kind of combination is quite common.
Don´t reply to this with just: "A 4k USD SGI would be impossible to do,
or if it isn´t it would be a bad product....jada, jada..."

Just like MIPS and others do it, only do the engineering work and let
others produce the stuff. SGI could do likewise with this new desktop.
Using their knowledge and alot of already produced and thought of items
and items of the shelf. I won´t get into details about what a 4k USD SGI
should have and not have, I just believe when seeing other companies
produce stuff that don´t suck at 3-4k why shoudn´t SGI be able to?

I, just like you folks, *love* SGI´s and I spend a few hours a week on
thinking how they could to things better. I am no engineer, just a very
computerinterested student who cares about fine computers and the
various interesting things you can do with them.


Niclas
___

SiliconGraphics, Computing in Style.

ah, the pointless drivel that no one really ever listens to, this is what make
usenet great.
all we need is Peckman to chime in!

Tom Kranz wrote:

> nicte wrote in message news:...
> > Tom Kranz wrote:
> > > Obviously I am an intellectual weakling, as your reasoning here
> > > escapes me.
> > >
> > > In what way is regular speed increases to a CPU "abnormal evolution"?
> > >
> > 100MHz increase by year ? yes it's abnormal like for SGI
> > no significant changes in architecture since 1996,
>
> Ah, I see your problem - beyond that of being mentally incapacitated.
>
> Just because a MIPS CPU has a low clock speed does not mean it is not
> a fast CPU.
>
> A 3.2GHz clock speed means nothing if the CPU is idle the bulk of the
> time due to bottlenecks in the rest of the architecture.
>
> This is so mind-numbingly obvious that I cannot believe you are
> unaware of this.
>
> If you think clock speed defines how fast a machine is, why on earth
> do you have an SGI machine?
>
> In fact - *do* you even have an SGI? Do you even understand the most
> basic ideas that have gone into their design?
>
> Or are you one of the countless PC using imbeciles who bought an SGI
> because it "was cool", and are now whining because the clock speed is
> lower than a PC toy, or you can't run games, or 2D apps suck?
>
> > maybe in R18k, which
> > is dropped as we know
> > no mentio about any new graphics pipes
>
> My God! Are you blind? Were you beaten as a child? Did you mother
> repeatedly drop you on your head? Please, come out of your cave,
> Troglodyte boy - wake up, it's 2004!
>
> R18K is nothing but a name that people OUTSIDE of SGI have tagged onto
> the next generation CPU.
>
> It may or may not be called R18K, but it certainly has not been
> dropped - as has been pointed out countless times by people who
> actually have visibility of this.
>
> And, as has been pointed out countless times, you DO NOT have
> visibility of this because you are a whining nobody who has bought
> nothing from SGI.
>
> And addressing your other fatuous statement:
>
> In what way does the Onyx4 have "no new graphics pipes"? Or Tezro?
>
> In what way is an efficient, dual core MIPS CPU not a "significant
> change in architecture"?
>
> Do you even understand what these things are?
>
> >
> > > In what way is producing faster CPUs for customers who want faster
> > > CPUs "unperfect marketing"?
> > >
> > like above + astro-pricelist + fatal support
> > yes it's unperfect for sure
>
> How would you know?
>
> Have you ever bought anything from SGI?
>
> Have you bought their support?
>
> Have you had to use their kit and support in a business-critical
> environment?
>
> Of course not - you are a whiny ignorant PC user who bought a 2nd hand
> SGI, and you now think SGI owe you something - because, hey, you can
> get Linux for free, so why can't SGI give all their good stuff away
> for *nothing*?
>
> You utter imbecile. My word, your parents must live in daily shame,
> shattered with the knowledge that they brought someone so incapable of
> independant thought into the world.
>
> I have bought equipment from SGI, I have bought their support, and I
> have used it in business-critical environments.
>
> Their kit did what it needed to do, and their support was excellent.
>
> If you buy SGI kit for the wrong reasons and use it for the wrong
> applications, whose fault is that? SGIs? Or yours, as the idiot who
> thought that something expensive and cool looking would fulfill any
> need?
>
> > nice performance -2,5 times slower than Itanium, really nice indeed
> > but price is many many times higher
> > no surprice that one by one companies exchange their hardware and
> > software to wintel ****
>
> I have, and will continue to, pay that higher price, because there are
> situations where SGI kit will do what no-one elses will.
>
> Which does not make the price high - it makes it a bargain. Not that I
> expect someone as mentally inferior as yourself to understand
> something so basic and fundamental.
>
> Who cares if Itanium is faster on a meaningless benchmark, which bears
> no relation to real-world application load?
>
> Ah - I forget. Vacuous loud mouths like yourself who have never had to
> use this stuff for a business, and who think SPEC marks and Quake FPS
> figures are somehow a real measure of how a system will perform for
> your application and workload.
>
> > >
> > > As a vocal yet mentally limited bystander, you are unaware of what SGI
> > > are doing. You have bought nothing from them, and never will, because
> > > you percieve SGI's products as being valueless.
> > >
> > Well as a customer I'd like to run the software made for SGI
> > but, you know, a reasonably recent software...
>
> A customer?
>
> *Really*?
>
> And which system have you bought from SGI? Which support contract? Who
> was the salesman you spoke to? Who is your account manager?
>
> You have bought nothing from SGI. You feel that SGI owe you something
> because you bought one of their old systems, second hand.
>
> > not old versions from 1996,
> > in nowadays you can fiond a soft for IRIX mostly in dropped platforms
> > section
> > And it's not my opinion but opinion of soft makers
> > Even Discreel Logic has started moving to Linux -very very sad
> > one of the last bastions surrendered
>
> Discrete have brought out a version of their software to support a
> new, low cost, limited capability platform.
>
> That is basic business sense - basic common sense even. Something you
> appear to have a fatal lack of.
>
> In what way does that mean that SGI will die? Because Discrete add
> support for another platform - a platform that Discrete will openly
> acknowledge is not as capable as IRIX - mean that SGI is doomed?
>
> Discrete's software on IRIX is capable of far more than similar
> software running on Linux.
>
> If that is of value to a studio, they will pay the higher price. That
> higher initial cost will help them achieve profits that they would not
> have achieved using another solution.
>
> That is of benefit to them.
>
> I think it is telling that the only people who whine on comp.sys.sgi
> about the high price of SGI systems and the software they run are
> people who do not have to make a living from them.
>
> Why does a business owe you something, when you produce nothing for
> them?
>
> And spare me that crap about University students coming into business
> and recommending Linux instead of SGI, or not knowing about SGI.
>
> That is utter toss, spouted by people with no business experience at
> all.
>
> To believe that new hires with no experience can somehow affect the
> technology and infrastructure decisions of a business is blinkered,
> wishfull thinking of the worst sort.
>
> Maybe one day when you grow up and have to work for a living you will
> find this out for yourself.
>
> Cheers,
> TOM

SkyWriter wrote:
> ah, the pointless drivel that no one really ever listens to, this is what make
> usenet great.
> all we need is Peckman to chime in!
>

shhh... per ekman is way too busy recompiling the latest kernel!


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
cosmos See no linux
@ Hear no linux
hepcat.org Speak no linux
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

"joe smith" wrote in message news:...
(snip)
> Just
> recently a local CAD firm sold their inventory of SGI boxes, because all
> their customers moved to Linux based systems. They *could* keep working on
> SGI platform, but this would mean they wouldn't have customers and it would
> not make economic sense to continue pursuing software development for IRIX.

Which CAD company BTW? If you cannot post, shoot me an e-mail, or at
least a hint. I am interested in this. From what I know of MCAD
scene on Linux, this seems unusual at this point in time. Could be
CAD fits a number of diciplines, maybe its not Mechanical Cad, but
something more general. In any case, I would be interested in
learning a coupla details, if you can share.