On 24 May 2006 06:51:02 -0700
"llothar" <llothar@web.de> wrote:

> To write a device driver in the late 90'th that does not work with
> _ALL_ modern ATAPI cdroms is just a failure of the programmers and
> terrible ignorance from Sun. I've never seen such problems with
> anything operating system except Solaris.

You see too much goodness in one direction and not enough in the other.

I've had endless hassles with a cheap (Chips & Technologies, to be
exact) mobo from 1999 trying to get it to boot from a LG DVD drive
(which with an ASUS board of the same year gave no trouble). There is no
way that one can guarantee that code written in the late 1990ies will
react correctly to hardware from 2006. There's plenty of new hardware
that would not supported by Windows 2000 (or XP) without modern
drivers.

The U5/10 are not very good, hardware-wise. But how many x86 systems of
the same vintage are still worth using? I don't understand why people
still want to use U5/10 systems.

> And the Sun guys don't do anything against it. Even with modern
> supported IDE controllers you are limited to 120 GB with Solaris 10.

Baloney. I've a couple of 300GB drives in a Solaris 10 box.

> This sucks, sucks, sucks.

It's really very simple - if you don't like Sun, or Solaris, buy
something else.

--
Stefaan A Eeckels
--
Isn't it amazing how a large number of evil morons can give the
appearance of being a single evil genius? --Mel Rimmer

Sorry if i add a PCI IDE controller card supported by solaris into a
U10 then it has nothing to do with U10 hardware. But the os still has a
limit of 128 GB when used with a cmd680/sil680 where the hardware on
all other OS supports 500 GB disks.

So you are just speaking lies for your big boss. I'm tired of your
postings Casper.

llothar wrote:
> Sorry if i add a PCI IDE controller card supported by solaris into a
> U10 then it has nothing to do with U10 hardware. But the os still has a
> limit of 128 GB when used with a cmd680/sil680 where the hardware on
> all other OS supports 500 GB disks.
>
> So you are just speaking lies for your big boss. I'm tired of your
> postings Casper.
>

Just to help me understand: Why do you use a Sun workstation if you
don't like them at all?

Helge

llothar wrote:

> So you are just speaking lies for your big boss. I'm tired of your
> postings Casper.

If anyone who knows anything about Suns might have had any thoughts you
were sensible, that comment will leave no doubt they were mistaken.

--
Dave K MCSE.

MCSE = Minefield Consultant and Solitaire Expert.

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: month-year@domain. Hitting reply will work
for a couple of months only. Later set it manually.

Because i have a Sun system that works well and that i hope to use it
for the next three or more years. Took me a while and some money to
find the right working components.

But it's a pain in the ass to see that i can't extend it when i reach
the limits in the future. I don't have problems buying a new Sun/Sparc
but there isn't anything out there that fits the purpose as good as an
old U10. Cheap, low energy consumption that works about 1 hour with my
small UPS and completely silent (12 db) thanks to replaced PC
components.

None of the new and noisy Blades are useable for my purpose.

llothar wrote:
> Because i have a Sun system that works well and that i hope to use it
> for the next three or more years. Took me a while and some money to
> find the right working components.
>
> But it's a pain in the ass to see that i can't extend it when i reach
> the limits in the future. I don't have problems buying a new Sun/Sparc
> but there isn't anything out there that fits the purpose as good as an
> old U10. Cheap, low energy consumption that works about 1 hour with my
> small UPS and completely silent (12 db) thanks to replaced PC
> components.
>
> None of the new and noisy Blades are useable for my purpose.
>

Ok, that is a good reason. I don't know about the energy consumption of
my Blade, but the noise is definitely not a problem.
The Blade makes a lot of noise on startup and shutdown (seems to be a
kind of self test), but in normal operation mode it isn't louder than an
average PC, and the noisiest part of it is the 10000 rpm hard drive,
which could be easily replaced by another, much more silent model.

Concerning your statement about Casper... this newsgroup is not a sales
channel, so there won't be a reason for Casper or any other guys from
Sun to tell us lies about the features or non-features of their hardware
or software features. You should always have pretty good evidence to
call somebody else a liar. Sorry, that's my opinion... and no, I am not
a Sun employee.

Helge

I don't use average PC's. I'm trying to compare with quality hardware
not the cheap end.

For me the only acceptable silent computer is one where i can't tell
you if it is on or off without looking if the frontpanel lights are on.
I'm living in a room with open windows (thai construction style) so
there is always the nature background noise. But i'm 100% sure that the
Blade is louder then the birds and frogs in my garden. My Intel iMac,
my AMD X2 and my U10 all run many hours a day and i can still hear the
ants marching.

And Casper is posting the same arguments too many times even when other
people reported that it is not working. So he either is unable to
accept facts or he ignores them and this is why i calling his posting a
lie.

In article <1148737893.592460.305970@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups .com>,
llothar@web.de says...
> Sorry if i add a PCI IDE controller card supported by solaris into a
> U10 then it has nothing to do with U10 hardware. But the os still has a
> limit of 128 GB when used with a cmd680/sil680 where the hardware on
> all other OS supports 500 GB disks.
>
> So you are just speaking lies for your big boss. I'm tired of your
> postings Casper.

Back under your bridge, moron.

Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
> The U5/10 are not very good, hardware-wise. But how many x86 systems of
> the same vintage are still worth using? I don't understand why people
> still want to use U5/10 systems.

I am using 5x U5 systems as headless servers because they work, I have
spares (I saved about 10 of them when we upgraded a lab of U5s to SB150
desktops) so I don't need to have them under maintenance, they fit
quite well into 19" racks if you have shelves or angle brackets screwed
into the racks. I have had 2 fail in the past 6 months - once I run out
of spare systems I will have to find something else to use :-).

On 28 May 2006 07:19:30 -0700
"David Wilson" <mcs6502@gmail.com> wrote:

> Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
> > The U5/10 are not very good, hardware-wise. But how many x86
> > systems of the same vintage are still worth using? I don't
> > understand why people still want to use U5/10 systems.
>
> I am using 5x U5 systems as headless servers because they work, I have
> spares (I saved about 10 of them when we upgraded a lab of U5s to
> SB150 desktops) so I don't need to have them under maintenance, they
> fit quite well into 19" racks if you have shelves or angle brackets
> screwed into the racks. I have had 2 fail in the past 6 months - once
> I run out of spare systems I will have to find something else to
> use :-).

That's a perfectly good reason, I agree. But where IMHO it made sense a
couple of years ago to buy them as a hobbyist, today there are far
better Suns that can be bought for very reasonable prices. 750MHz Blade
1000 prices are very low, and the Blade 100/150 (which in terms of
hardware quality is certainly no worse than a U5) are not exactly
expensive either.

--
Stefaan A Eeckels
--
One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils
in this world are to be cured by legislation. -- Thomas Reed