josehill wrote: By 2015 standards, sure, but by the standards of its time, IRIX was an outstanding server OS.
If he's got a time machine, I got first dibs
Otherwise, we now live in 2015, old man
josehill wrote: By 2015 standards, sure, but by the standards of its time, IRIX was an outstanding server OS.
calvin wrote: nor is it optimized for server workloads and applications.
foetz wrote:calvin wrote: nor is it optimized for server workloads and applications.
could you be a bit more specific?
how are server workloads and sever applications defined? and is that not completely dependent on each case?
hamei wrote:foetz wrote:calvin wrote: nor is it optimized for server workloads and applications.
could you be a bit more specific?
how are server workloads and sever applications defined? and is that not completely dependent on each case?
You do not want me to go dig out an email I once got from the guy running Hubble's storage on SGI He had plenty of very negative things to say about both the product and the people.
My own experience with both a Fuel and an O350 has been quite negative as well. The desktop and the applications are great, but I wouldn't depend on an SGI to watch the paint dry.
They went broke for a reason It's easy to get caught up in liking them because at one time they were good, but that time was looong ago. And short.
It's still way better than Loonix tho
uunix wrote: But are we not being a bit two faced on the fact, we like to use this retro equipment for what it was at the time and lets face it, yes in this day and age there are possibly better, faster ways on other hardware, but we like SGI (some of it) and that's why we make the best of what it is.
So comparing SGI server abilities to modern solutions is rather unfair on SGI.
And at the time, I bet we could produce a million people who companied about IRIX, AIX, HPUX etc, but I bet we could find the same number to complain about modern day servers also.