|
http://web.mit.edu/simsong/www/ugh.pdf 
akadajet fucked around with this message at 14:58 on Jan 21, 2016 |
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:26 |
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:itanium was very successful for hp. it was a dreadful failure for intel and everyone else who touched it. most particularly the first itanium, "merced." what was the advantage itanium had over other architectures? i don't mean x86 but the other architectures that companies had already been using for their 'big iron'
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
i guess my question really is why did so many companies buy into itanium and then keep buying itanium even after the initial flop
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
kickbacks and non tech's making purchasing decisions i assume
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
these are separate questions, so i will address them separatelyFarmer Crack-rear end posted:what was the advantage itanium had over other architectures? i don't mean x86 but the other architectures that companies had already been using for their 'big iron' intel was then, as now, the 800 lb gorilla in the semiconductor industry. they could make bigger chips, cheaper, on more advanced process nodes. hppa/pa-risc was already very competitive. everyone knew that hp was working with intel on a pa-risc competitor. and pentium pro was eating them all alive. hobbyists barely remember ppro because it was expensive and regular people didn't buy them. but it was a real eye opener for the industry: a $3,000 chip that could humiliate the processors in $50,000 workstations. intel had declared an interest in conquering RISC, and nobody wanted to bet against intel. Farmer Crack-rear end posted:i guess my question really is why did so many companies buy into itanium and then keep buying itanium even after the initial flop hp was the only company to stick with itanium after its flop nature became apparent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:i guess my question really is why did so many companies buy into itanium and then keep buying itanium even after the initial flop from what I remember of my computer architecture class and other sources, itanium's VLIW architecture was supposed to be super hot poo poo just as soon as they got optimized compilers written for it. the problem is that a VLIW compiler has to do some pretty intense poo poo and they never really got as good as everyone hoped. hp ported VMS to itanium though which is kind of cool, even though VMS is the finest metaphor for government bureaucracy ever made (counterpoint: VMS actually functions ok once you figure it out)
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:from what I remember of my computer architecture class and other sources, itanium's VLIW architecture was supposed to be super hot poo poo just as soon as they got optimized compilers written for it. the buzzword was EPIC: Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computing. the idea was that you could move pipelining / scheduling / branch prediction into the compiler, and issue an instruction stream that would maximize the use of functional units this didn't work at all. not even a little bit. itanium 2, the first chip you could actually buy, was superscalar, defeating the whole point of EPIC. Pham Nuwen posted:hp ported VMS to itanium though which is kind of cool, even though VMS is the finest metaphor for government bureaucracy ever made (counterpoint: VMS actually functions ok once you figure it out) hp sold openvms to a spinoff, VMS Software http://www.vmssoftware.com/ mission #1: port to x86
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
i installed vms on that alphastation i posted a while back. life's fun, you had to go to some hp site and request a license for the tcp/ip package iirc. then there were licenses for the compilers and poo poo like that. couldn't use the software until they'd emailed you the hobbyist license. they didn't seem very big on organization, the system directories were just huge piles of files. maybe it had something to do with using "set def" instead of something simpler like "cd" to change directories... if it's a pain in the rear end nobody wants to bother
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
At work, sitting to my left is an SGI Octane2 with its bigass CRT monitor. Its brothers, two SGI Octanes, are sitting to my right in a cart. The reason for this is all three were used in a lab that does protein simulations or something and these three machines somehow have DATA ON THEM THAT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT yet not backed up anywhere. At home I still have my first for realzies computer, an Acer 486DX. Bastard still works. Have a few various Sun boxes at home along with an old 1/2u gateway server that I should get rid of.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
iirc itanium only really worked great for certain kinds of fortran code that worked well with vector processing or w/e
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
i had a system (dont remember the model) with 4 pentium pro gold cap, it didn't work and it was a mess someone bought it for 120$ apparently the gold on there is pretty valuable
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:what was the advantage itanium had over other architectures? i don't mean x86 but the other architectures that companies had already been using for their 'big iron' Cheap. Just not cheap enough to compete with x64 unsurprisingly enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
What computer can I get today that will be fetishized in 20 years despite being overpriced garbage. I don't have the mid six figgies to dump on a $2,000 trash can.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:What computer can I get today that will be fetishized in 20 years despite being overpriced garbage. I don't have the mid six figgies to dump on a $2,000 trash can. imac
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:What computer can I get today that will be fetishized in 20 years despite being overpriced garbage. I don't have the mid six figgies to dump on a $2,000 trash can. Something with a processor architecture that will have lost out to Intel during that time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:What computer can I get today that will be fetishized in 20 years despite being overpriced garbage. I don't have the mid six figgies to dump on a $2,000 trash can. it'll be the trash can. rare poo poo no one can have is a sure bet for fetishization the sun desktop i've been trying to get working would have been pretty expensive back in 2000. using the figures from sun's own price list: A27-ULD4-9V-1024AQ WS U80/4X450,IFB,1GB,18G 30,795.00 H X7005A OPT MEMORY 512MB (2*256MB) 2,600.00 H X5240A Opt int Disk 36.4GB/10k USCSI 2,650.00 H totals out to $54,245. in 2000 dollars. that's like $75k in today's money. for a desktop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:totals out to $54,245. in 2000 dollars. that's like $75k in today's money. for a desktop. Person I bought it for better have needed it to finish their work on the philosopher's stone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
SYSV Fanfic posted:What computer can I get today that will be fetishized in 20 years despite being overpriced garbage. I don't have the mid six figgies to dump on a $2,000 trash can. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:it'll be the trash can.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:i'll be the trash can
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
today Weird Stuff had a big rack outside saying "FREE SUN SOFTWARE" so I picked up a complete Sun Developer Essentials for Enterprise package that includes media for Solaris 8 for both SPARC and Intel, as well as the Sun developer tools with a license code that doesn't need to access Sun's old licensing server to be used also it includes CodeWarrior for Java for Solaris, which should be fun nB.S.D. (or anyone else) let me know if you want like a Solaris 2.6 or 7 or 8 media set for SPARC, they have a few and I could pick one up to ship you
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 04:44
|
|
|
eschaton posted:today Weird Stuff had a big rack outside saying "FREE SUN SOFTWARE" so I picked up a complete Sun Developer Essentials for Enterprise package that includes media for Solaris 8 for both SPARC and Intel, as well as the Sun developer tools with a license code that doesn't need to access Sun's old licensing server to be used weird stuff and halted are pretty much the only things i miss from the bay area. those, and easy international flights.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 06:23
|
|
|
compsci dot txt
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:45
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
This book changed my life. Poettering is right, sysv compatibility has to die. Or how I learned to stop worrying and love the D.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
surprisingly many hoops to jump through to get Solaris to recognize my SS20's new 147GB SCA disk had to boot NetBSD 7 from CD, partition the disk with it, and only then would the Solaris 8 (2/02) installer do something besides crash when examining the disk repartitioning etc. during the install went fine though, and everything is now happily running and building a more modern GCC (4.2.1, last GPLv2) than the 3.x I can get from a SunFreeware archive
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
oh yeah, I'm confused by OpenCSW because I wasn't able to easily find a "this is what we have for Solaris 8" listing, and they talk about 8 being deprecated, it really seems to be for people who are running the latest Solaris so I'll probably use the SunFreeware bits to bootstrap my own set of packages, which means I should probably learn how to build packages for Solaris… right now I'm just configuring the stuff I build myself with --prefix=/opt/gnu for expedience, once I figure out how to build real packages I can do it right and maybe target a different location
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
eschaton posted:oh yeah, I'm confused by OpenCSW because I wasn't able to easily find a "this is what we have for Solaris 8" listing, and they talk about 8 being deprecated, it really seems to be for people who are running the latest Solaris opencsw used to do releases like a linux distribution. the last version for sol 8 was "dublin." i think sol 9 got at least one more. http://ftp.heanet.ie/pub/opencsw/dublin/sparc/5.8/ edit: looks like they have a precompiled gcc 4.3, so that's cool
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
just helped a coworker resurrect a Fujitsu S-4/Leia2 it was running OPENSTEP 4.2J eschaton fucked around with this message at 04:51 on Jan 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 04:42
|
|
|
eschaton posted:just helped a coworker resurrect a Fujitsu S-4/Leia2 you found the only japanese openstep user i didn't even know there was a japanese localization
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:you found the only japanese openstep user dude I work at NeXT
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
here’s another user of NeXT software on that SPARC laptop (sorry if your OS is a POS and can’t just show you a PostScript document)
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
eschaton posted:dude I work at NeXT well now i understand the bizarre defenses for xnu's crimes
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:well now i understand the bizarre defenses for xnu's crimes I think you mean Mach's superiority to a traditional UNIX design approach
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 05:44
|
|
|
i always thought amigas were cool but i was too young to experience that scene they seem like they would have been nice to use e: i didnt notice this thread was 5 pages somehow and theyve prolly already been discussed take the moon fucked around with this message at 07:46 on Jan 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 07:40
|
|
|
get an amiga 500 or 1200 to run demos/listed to modules/play games don't invest yourself in the "modern" amiga scene and you'll be fine
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 07:49
|
|
|
post-commodore amigas are like half a degree removed from fursuits
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 07:56
|
|
|
I'm not sure it's even that much https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNR5vxAR22A
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 08:00
|
|
|
Olivil posted:get an amiga 500 or 1200 to run demos/listed to modules/play games but what about that new FPGA implementation of the 68K that's insanely fast and plugs right in to an A600?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 11:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:26 |
|
|
eschaton posted:but what about that new FPGA implementation of the 68K that's insanely fast and plugs right in to an A600? want this for my se/30. speaking of which, can old rear end macs like the se/30 boot and install the os from CD-ROM, or does that have to be done via floppy? my se/30 has the caddy CD-ROM unit and a lan card and is v. baller Beve Stuscemi fucked around with this message at 03:44 on Jan 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2016 03:26
|
|
