[geeks] computer room gallery 8-)

[Joshua D Boyd]

On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 07:50:57PM -0800, Peter L. Wargo wrote:
> Sun kept sites it was investigating under NDA until they were sure what
> the problem was.  (A factor that added to the confusion was that SRAM from
> one manufacturer seemed much more stable than that of another.)  Once they
> knew what the issue really was, they produced a revised module, and have
> swapped them at any sites that evidemce a problem. (Some sites seem more
> problematic than others, especially those with bad datacenter conditions.
> Also, I believe (not sure) that altitude can be an aggrivating factor.)
> 
> I think it was a wake-up call for Sun, as they have always been good as a
> reactive company, but not very proactive.  I know that they are now
> putting a real effort into RAS in product design.  

In one interview, Scott McNealy said that the majority of the problematic SRAM
came from IBM, and accusses IBM of knowing about the cause of the problem while
simulataneously advertising how IBM servers were more stable than Suns.  I 
don't know if this is true, but that guy seemed to be on the verge of bitter
about it.

-- 
Joshua D. Boyd