[rescue] OT: Linux and USB on Intel

[Dave McGuire]

On Wednesday, April 23, 2003, at 04:00 PM, Robert Novak wrote:
> On some platforms, newer machines are more efficient in terms of
> space/power/heat. We've had this discussion before. And on some
> platforms some users/admins need to run binary-distributed software.
> So there are reasons older stuff may no longer be useful in certain
> situations, even if it still runs and can be used for other situations.
> Oracle 9i with Applications 11i for example. I know you could write
> an ERP/CRM system with modern features and functionality to run
> under 4.1.3 or NetBSD, but would you want to run it on a 4/110?

   Binary distributions are an excellent point...I'll buy that one.  And 
no, of course I wouldn't run a 4/110 in a production environment today. 
  SPARC-wise, I won't run anything pre-Ultra1 (except for one straggling 
SS20 that's just working too well to replace...about a dozen virtual 
hosts).

   My point is that, except for playing games and playing MP3s, there's 
precious little about what we're doing with our machines today that is 
too much for something like a 4/110 to handle.  Bloatware like KDE and 
Gnome notwithstanding, of course.

   But yes, I do agree with your point.  This however:

> And as far as PCs as servers... something doesn't have to be the
> best thing on the market ever to be useful and usable. I expect
> the dual P3-500 on my coffee table would run rings around the Netra
> T1 in the computer room.

   Interesting.  I think you're running different Netra T1s than I am. 
;)  I replaced TWO P3-733s (running FreeBSD) with ONE Netra T1 
(Solaris8) about a year ago.  Get that checked, man.

        -Dave

--
Dave McGuire           "She's a cheek pincher.  I have scars."
St. Petersburg, FL                          -Gary Nichols