Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 16:55:16 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith) Cc: jehamby@lightside.com, hackers@freebsd.org, chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BeBox mention of FreeBSD... Message-ID: <199606102355.QAA05054@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199606102338.JAA06992@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at Jun 11, 96 09:08:37 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Terry would probably have something to say here... Yup. > Jake Hamby stands accused of saying: > > > > Thomas J. Merritt, president of CodeGen, on the BeBox: > > "I think it would make a terrific networking server. The only other thing > > that comes close in price/performance is a generic PC loaded with FreeBSD, > > ^^^^^^^ > > but that's a pain to configure. Windows NT and pay-for UNIX cost more, and > > *snort* How is anything going to be anything less 'painful' to configure? > Last I read the only ethernet adapter the Be OS supported was the NE2000, > which makes for a great network server, riiight. Well, there are drivers for other boards now. It'd be pretty easy to port BSD drivers for the thing. > > other desktop OS's don't offer memory protection or other niceties the > > BeBox has." Parag adds, "With the GeekPort, the BeBox could also be nice > > as a user-friendly factory floor controller." > > Anyone who puts a BeBox on the 'factory floor' has rocks in their head. > The 'GeekPort' isn't up to any sort of serious industrial interfacing, > and the BeBox box wouldn't have a hope of survival. Actually, the BeOS has good RT support that FreeBSD lacks. Coupled with the RS-485 capable ports, it's make an OK control box, though it seems more like a prototype set-top box than anything else to me. I would have a hard time trusting the "geekport" because of the ISA interfacing logic used throughout... I wish they had used the Apple or Motorolla or DEC parts and not put an ISA in there at all (stayed straight PCI). The argument at the time was lack of ethernet (not a problem) sound (GUS, etc. -- not a problem), and internal support for IDE (which is a dumb idea anyway, when they have SCSI). So, "geekport" aside, I think that it would make a nice little embedded systems controller. I remember when IOmega was using Commodore 64's loaded from tape drives to run their optical interferometry hardware for their Zirconium bonding in their Bernoulli heads. Don't underestimate cheap hardware with NMI-based scheduling. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606102355.QAA05054>