Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 12:38:18 -0600 (CST) From: Jim Bryant <jbryant@unix.tfs.net> To: freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD/Alpha (Fwd) Message-ID: <199802051838.MAA03148@unix.tfs.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
oops... forgot to Cc: the list... ----- Forwarded message from jbryant ----- >From jbryant Thu Feb 5 12:35:11 1998 Subject: Re: FreeBSD/Alpha In-Reply-To: <E191A8FCC38DD111A84900E029115B40A1F6@OCTOPUS> from Paul Richards at "Jan 30, 98 12:39:04 pm" To: paul@originat.demon.co.uk (Paul Richards) Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 12:35:12 -0600 (CST) Reply-to: jbryant@argus.tfs.net X-Windows: R00LZ!@# MS-Winbl0wz DR00LZ!@# X-files: The truth is that the X-Files is fiction X-Republican: The best kind!!! X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT #0: Thu Jan 1 19:03:58 CST 1998 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL32 (25)] In reply: > Unfortunately I don't think so. All I've read over the last few days, > not all > relating to Compaq's aquisition, looks very bad for commercial Unix. > From > the press releases I've seen from Compaq the main benefit of the > aquisition is > Digital's support infrastructure. Digital had already shed large parts > of it's corporation. > The alpha chip looked doomed anyhow, the fabrication side of the > business had been sold > to Intel and Digital had already stated that they yould be supporting > the IA-64 chip in the > future. They've also sold off their networking arm as well. It looked to > me at the time like > they were shedding parts of the company that a prospective buyer didn't > want in order to make > them more attractive to said buyer. [blah blah blah] > In other reports (all my reports are from CNET by the way, get lots of > useful news if you subscrib to their daily Why not check what Digital has to say? http://www.digital.com/alphaserver/news/1000mhz_298.html for instance... [I just got that in the "AlphaServer Update" today]... sounds to me like DEC is into Alpha for the LONG-TERM... > mailings) it looks like Unix sales are in very serious decline. NT > outsold unix by a huge margin last year (I forget the figures but you Yes. And PCs also outsold large systems by a very similar percentage... NT has it's place. Unix has it's place... NT will die if it attempts to take over the performance market, it is not capable of doing it efficiently and reliably like Unix and Guardian are. Business is business... Spend $50k - $1 million+ on a system and you will not be running NT, now or in the future on that system. It's a reliability issue, and a bang for the buck issue. Yes, NT can run fast on a fast system, but Unix will run FASTER on the same system, and more reliably too! NT makes a great office fileserver system... Leave it to Unix and Guardian to handle performance tasks... Most of the PC dweebs out there just don't understand the performance computing market, I guess... Got to go... Getting ready for some MC/ServiceGuard cluster configuration changes tonight [yes, unix! HP/UX to be exact]... jim -- All opinions expressed are mine, if you | "I will not be pushed, stamped, think otherwise, then go jump into turbid | briefed, debriefed, indexed, or radioactive waters and yell WAHOO !!! | numbered!" - #1, "The Prisoner" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Inet: jbryant@tfs.net AX.25: kc5vdj@wv0t.#neks.ks.usa.noam grid: EM28pw voice: KC5VDJ - 6 & 2 Meters AM/FM/SSB, 70cm FM. http://www.tfs.net/~jbryant ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HF/6M/2M: IC-706-MkII, 2M: HTX-212, 2M: HTX-202, 70cm: HTX-404, Packet: KPC-3+
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802051838.MAA03148>