Casper H.S. Dik <Casper.Dik@sun.com> wrote:

> That's certainly what seems to have happened. The difference certainly
> is smaller than the SS10/SS20 bump (where the looks didn't change
> but all that happened was a speed bump)

there really was more difference between the SS10 and the SS20.
The 10 only had external speakers while the 20 had those crappy
internal ones standard. The 20 had a faster Mbus (maybe sbus too?)
and of course the 20 lacked the ISDN ports although the chip
is still there because it also does the audio part. Also the 20
always had the option for the onboard SX framebuffer, that was
only available in the special 10SX.

However, I don't really understand the problem with all this.
Essentially relabing the same technology as a new or another
product has happened before:
Sun 3/160 = 3/180
SPARCstation LX = SPARCclassic (the latter lacked the ISDN part)
Ultra 1 = E150
Ultra 60 = E220R = Netra 1125/1120
And this is just a list of Suns that come to my mind at the
moment. You can find a lot more if you look at other vendors too.
Maybe the final point of difference is simply a "we don't
support this", but then it's the choice of the company anyway.
You probably can put the 1.2GHz CPUs in a Blade 1000, but
then it will be unsupported like putting the fast SuperSPARC II
or HyperSPARC CPUs in a SPARCstation 10. Sure, it works, but
noone will guarantee that the system won't overheat or have
other problems.
There are really other things about Suns product policy
to complain about like charging money for any kind of service.
The systems handbook or Solaris 10 patches come to my
mind quickly. I think they will lose more customers
because of that, rather than because of relabeling some
product. Of course that's just my 0.02 EURO.

mfg
Dennis

--
Das Schicksal ist wie ein Gorilla im Kaefig.
Es bewirft Dich mit Kot wenn Du es verspottest.