Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

SGI Lives On, In Name At Least

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the meet-the-new-boss dept.

Silicon Graphics 107

Hugh Pickens writes "In a surprise corporate move, after Rackable Systems received bankruptcy court approval on April 30 to close its purchase of SGI, the company announced on Monday that the deal had closed and that the combined company would be called SGI — short for Silicon Graphics International instead of the original Silicon Graphics Inc. The revival of the SGI brand will certainly please people in Silicon Valley with a historical bent, as SGI has been one of the area's true icons. However, some consider this a curious turn of events, considering that Rackable has come to represent the new guard in the server market, while SGI has struggled for years. Executives hope the name change will help it expand its business overseas, where SGI is a better-known brand. The new SGI will also continue to develop and support the high-performance computing systems that Silicon Graphics was known for, says Rackable's president and CEO. 'There should be no disruption to Silicon Graphics customers.'"

cancel ×

107 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (4, Funny)

jimicus (737525) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920201)

Let's see - Caldera bought the remains of SCO, rebranded themselves SCO and tried to carry on with SCOs business model - which had already been shown to be at deaths' door as it was.

Sounds very similar. What next? SGI sues everyone who uses Linux?

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (2, Interesting)

A12m0v (1315511) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920253)

let's hope they embrace Linux and opensource IRIX.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (2, Interesting)

bsdaemonaut (1482047) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920525)

They've pretty much already done this. The last major release of IRIX was in 1998. They stopped selling MIPS IRIX in 2006 and end-of-life for MIPS IRIX is 2013. Though they specifically state MIPS IRIX I can't find any mention of continuing versions based on other architectures. Not to mention, very few people wanted to run IRIX outside of SGI systems. So in effect, IRIX is currently stagnant beyond minor patches and will soon be completely dropped. They do, on the other hand, offer linux on all their new systems and have been doing so for years. They make some claims as to have "given back" to the linux community but I'm not sure how true that is. I doubt they'll ever opensource IRIX, it's a dinosaur and very likely it would die out as quickly as OpenDarwin. There is barely room for new opensource operating systems out there, much less ones that haven't been significantly updated in 10 years.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (2, Insightful)

Byzantine (85549) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920761)

Probably the "giving back" is a reference to XFS [wikipedia.org] . They may have given more, but nothing else that I'm aware of has been high-profile.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (2, Informative)

eugene2k (1213062) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921355)

I think Linus mentioned somewhere in his blog (or in some interview) that SGI people have contributed code to improve scalability of the kernel.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27921597)

Ummmm... OpenGL ring a bell.... Yeah, SGI gave that to the entire computing world.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

bsdaemonaut (1482047) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922081)

You are correct, but I was talking about linux development in particular at the time. Seeing as how OpenGL was publically released in 1992, was a open API, and Torvald's *began* working on what would eventually become Linux in 1991 it can hardly be considered a project specifically contributed to linux. I did mention GLX, which is probably what you meant, when I corrected myself.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27922835)

Mesa (the de-facto Open Source OpenGL implementation) gained functionality when SGI open-sourced their OpenGL implementation. It also gained a decent GLUT implementation. Also XFS, some compiler technology, bits of X.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (5, Informative)

MrMr (219533) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920819)

They make some claims as to have "given back" to the linux community
Well, they were the first to port Linux to a serious parallel architecture. Still not many vendors that will support a 512-core and 1-kernel system...
About the giving back: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/ [sgi.com] if you want to check

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

bsdaemonaut (1482047) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920969)

Yeah somehow I had forgotten about projects like XFS, fam, and GLX, among other things.

BRING BACK THE CHROME CUBE LOGO (2, Funny)

Philip K Dickhead (906971) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921149)

Seriously. That's all we really want. Chrome cube on a purple case.

Re:BRING BACK THE CHROME CUBE LOGO (1)

bsdaemonaut (1482047) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921233)

Yeah I always had a soft spot for the SGI Indigo, though the thing was built like a tank and sported the biggest graphics cards I've seen to date.

Re:BRING BACK THE CHROME CUBE LOGO (2, Interesting)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922209)

Ugh, those damn things were ugly. They may have been built like tanks, but taking one apart [obsolyte.com] was like trying to solve a Rubik's cube. (an angled case fan?!) One has to be extra careful when pulling out the graphics card because it was easy to catch its cap on the frame and rip it right off!

The Oxygen and O2 were far more elegant designs. I wished that regular PCs had that kind of setup (the CPU and boards were covered with massive heatsinks but no dedicated fans, but the chassis had two huge master fans keeping the whole thing cool). And all SGI machines were very picky about their hardware. Sometimes solving a hanging boot meant changing the DIMMS around.

Re:BRING BACK THE CHROME CUBE LOGO (1)

bsdaemonaut (1482047) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922383)

That's the Indigo2 you are talking about which was extremely ugly and packed tight because of its pizza-box style box. The Indigo was a much nicer design and I don't know many people who wouldn't have drooled over it when it was current.

Here try this link at the same site: http://www.obsolyte.com/sgi_indigo/ [obsolyte.com]

Re:BRING BACK THE CHROME CUBE LOGO (1)

Philip K Dickhead (906971) | more than 5 years ago | (#27930709)

I have 3 R4000 'Blackjack' models lik ethis, at home. 2 have Elite graphics sets. All have DAT with audio firmware. Except for proprietary KB pinout, they are no trouble at all. I am thinking of rewiring a USB2PS/2 dongle to update the input devices.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

BlueStrat (756137) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921255)

Not to mention, very few people wanted to run IRIX outside of SGI systems.

Well, as someone who owns an Octane R12000 300mHz 64 bit machine (CMNB015ANG300) plus matching SGI 20-inch monitor (Sony GDM-4011P) I purchased used (and very cheap! :D ) from a fellow-LUG member who basically gave up on learning its' ins-and-outs, it would be great to have IRIX et al open-sourced. The Octane is quite the machine at ~54 pounds, and is still impressive in many areas despite being over 10 years old.

I didn't receive the base install or upgrade discs with the machine as he didn't have them either, so I've had to live with some quirks left over from non-IRIX/Unix-familiar previous owners' dabbling with and in the system rather than doing a nice clean install. I just can't see spending somewhere around $600 for a license plus media for the IRIX 6.5 base install plus extra to bring it up to version 6.5.30.

Heck, I've still not located a decently-priced (~$175 is too expensive IMO, especially considering I paid $25 total for the Octane & monitor) Octane/IRIX-compatible external SCSI CDROM.

Strat

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (3, Informative)

toxygen01 (901511) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921397)

IRIX license comes with your machine. You don't have to buy another one (aside from fact they wouldn't sell it to you). Just get install media (support.sgi.com for instance - last free offered overlay is 6.5.22). though, you will have to have 6.5 original install media. In this case I can only advise eBay or torrent (demonoid has one nice 2.5gb torrent with all 6.5 stuff + more).

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921757)

I think you can likely get such things here [sgidepot.co.uk] .

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

toxygen01 (901511) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921827)

I'm afraid not. http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/sgidepot/cds.html [sgidepot.co.uk] there are only update kits (which are offered through support.sgi.com too). It's pretty silly thing not to give customers install media if they have licenses (media could be lost or whatever...). but that's sgi, not always the logical way...

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

bsdaemonaut (1482047) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921625)

I believe the Octane came with IRIX 6.4 which was considered extremely unreliable. I would definitely recommend upgrading if you haven't already. I don't know where you have been looking, but you can get IRIX 6.5.x for around $20 on ebay. There is nothing particularly special about IRIX though, unless it's for sentimental reasons there are better operating systems available to you. I can definitely understand sentimental reasons, after all I have a Sun Sparc 4/5/20 and an UltraSparc 60 sitting here beside me and I own Solaris versions as old as 2.5.1.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921791)

I don't think there are any other operating systems that will run on his Octane....if he wants a different OS, he'll have to change h/w too.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

bsdaemonaut (1482047) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922215)

Linux will, but the patch is experimental. Surprisingly NetBSD and OpenBSD do not, but they support the same CPU on different models so I'm unclear as to why support hasn't been completely added yet.

So I guess I stand corrected, IRIX does sound better than Linux with experimental patches :P.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27925457)

IIRC, the reason that NetBSD support was never added was lacking support for the IP30's QLogic 2200 controller. Any disk writes corrupted the entire filesystem.

P.S: The word asked by slashdot for this comment was 'mating'.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27924465)

Actually, we (the Linux/MIPS community) are very much alive and into hacking Linux 2.6 onto the SGI IP22, 27, 28, 30 (Octane), and 32 (O2 with R5k).

Visit us on #gentoo-mips on Freenode. We're about to release the 2009.0 MIPS netboot images and livecd ISOs any day now.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27925055)

Ask 'kash' on the #gentoo-mips channel of Freenode for some IRIX disc images. There's a VMware appliance called DINA to let you netboot them easily and install IRIX without a SCSI CDROM.

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

BlueStrat (756137) | more than 5 years ago | (#27929057)

Ask 'kash' on the #gentoo-mips channel of Freenode for some IRIX disc images. There's a VMware appliance called DINA to let you netboot them easily and install IRIX without a SCSI CDROM.

Yeah, I grabbed a copy of DINA 1.0 from a Nekoware mirror. I just hope this old PC can handle the VMWare Player etc, as it's an old 2.0gHz P4 with only 768MB of RAM. If not, I may have to attempt to convince my friend (the sax player in my blues band) to loan me his dual-core laptop with 3.5GB of RAM. :P

Here's the URL for the Nekoware mirror containing DINA 1.0 plus the documentation in case anyone wants it: http://se.mirror.nekoware.net/IRIX/DINA/ [nekoware.net]

I *did* find the IRIX 6.5 base install .ISO images and extras on Demonoid and also the 6.5.30 upgrade .ISO images also. I haven't decided yet if I want to go that route, as I'm loathe to pirate stuff. It may end up being my only option though if I can't convince SGI to help without a boatload of cash.

Strat

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (2, Informative)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921821)

When most people talk about IRIX, they're really talking about the GUI, which is 4Dwm, and there's an on-going porting effort here [maxxdesktop.com] .

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (2, Interesting)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922437)

Reminds me of Cingular purchasing AT&T, then rebranding as AT&T. Cingular had a lot of goodwill for its excellent pricing, good coverage, and top notch service*. AT&T was seen as a dinosaur that was stuck in the past. They offered lousy pricing, terrible coverage, and some of the worst service in the industry.

Result? Cingular took all their goodwill and flushed it down the toilet in exchange for a brand name that no one wanted to have as their carrier. Even worse, their service took a nosedive after the merger, leading to a LOT of irate customers. Absolutely brilliant. :-/

* For a cellular company, anyway. We have to speak in relative terms here. :-P

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

dwye (1127395) | more than 5 years ago | (#27925275)

> Reminds me of Cingular purchasing AT&T, then rebranding as AT&T.

SBC bought AT&T, then renamed itself AT&T (which it was part of, prior to the Great Divestiture).

AT&T (nee SBC) then bought BellSouth, which meant that it owned all of Cingular (60% SBC, 40% BSouth, before that), so it decided to use the AT&T brand for its wireless services, while keeping the Cingular brand, too (consumers liked the Cingular brand, businesses the AT&T brand).

Cingular had earlier bought AT&T Wireless (aka AWS), which, despite the name, was not part of AT&T anymore, having been spun off years earlier.

Please keep this simple history straight :-)

Re:Didn't Caldera do something similar with SCO? (1)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 5 years ago | (#27925487)

Actually, that explains the SBC nosedive as well... :-P

SCO was a nice historic name transfer too (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27920207)

I hope the new SGI doesn't hire Darl McBride and start threatening everyone involved in computer graphics over patent violations (unspecified, of course).

Ice creram (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27920209)

I like Ice cream

State of IRIX? (1)

Alethes (533985) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920221)

Does this mean IRIX will be developed again? I'm not seeing any info one way or the other.

As a Linux and BSD guy, I'm pretty ignorant about IRIX other than the MIPS support. Does IRIX do anything innovative that makes developing it worthwhile?

Re:State of IRIX? (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920293)

I'm not sure why you would think this is even 'on-the-cards'. I would say that it's almost certainly not going to be developed again.

Re:State of IRIX? (1)

Burkin (1534829) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920357)

There was that 3d filesystem navigator that was used in the Jurassic Park movie.

fsn and fsv file managers (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920737)

There was that 3d filesystem navigator that was used in the Jurassic Park movie.

That was fsn [wikipedia.org] , which has been cloned [wikipedia.org] .

Re:State of IRIX? (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920389)

It had a "insert every CD between the first install and the current update" patch update method which made most sysadmins just rely on NFS (or interns) for updates, not to mention the Feature ans Maintenance streams. That's innovation.

Re:State of IRIX? (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921245)

It sounds like a good move to me...though a somewhat strange method of making admins do so.

Re:State of IRIX? (5, Insightful)

DavidChristopher (633902) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920587)

Does this mean IRIX will be developed again? I'm not seeing any info one way or the other.

As a Linux and BSD guy, I'm pretty ignorant about IRIX other than the MIPS support. Does IRIX do anything innovative that makes developing it worthwhile?

No. And I'm fairly certain of that.

IRIX was discontinued in 2006 by SGI - http://www.sgi.com/support/mips_irix.html [sgi.com] - and most of the cool technical features of IRIX were ported over to Linux ages ago - like xfs http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/ [sgi.com] . Actually, the correct question is will this new, improved and revived SGI continue to support the open source efforts of the old SGI regime? http://oss.sgi.com/projects/ [sgi.com] . I don't see a point in reviving IRIX, but there was a lot of OSS work done out of that shop and I'd hate to see it disappear. Right?

Re:State of IRIX? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27920773)

I would agree with that.

Re:State of IRIX? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27924691)

I wish they'd just open source IRIX. Those of us with old SGI hardware current have to use an old free version or pay for a more up to date copy. If IRIX was open source, people would fix holes in it.

Re:State of IRIX? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27920745)

I'm not sure about developing, but it would always be nice if they could open the sources for IRIX, along with SGI mipspro compiler ...
WM

Re:State of IRIX? (1)

toxygen01 (901511) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921461)

mipspro was "opensourced" for x86 & ia64 architecuters in form of Open64 compiler. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open64 [wikipedia.org] SGI put their code to academic hands with agreement they'll produce working and similarly efficient compiler for they upcoming products (Itanium pieces) now open64 supports many architectures including amd64, x-scale...

Re:State of IRIX? (2, Informative)

j1mmy (43634) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920861)

Everything SGI has sold over the last couple years runs linux.

Re:State of IRIX? (2, Interesting)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920961)

The best thing SGI ever sold though (back in 1997) ran Solaris [cray-cyber.org] . Too bad they didn't realize what they were selling.

Re:State of IRIX? (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922013)

I would question it being the best thing they ever sold, but it was certainly the stupidest move in selling it...

Re:State of IRIX? (1)

mikael (484) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922003)

As far as the command shells and development environment, IRIX seemed to be no different from any other release of Linux or Unix. Most of the innovation would have been with the device drivers interfacing to the graphics hardware and API's. But those patents were sold off to Microsoft.

The most memorable thing about the SGI's was the 'buttonfly' user interface for selecting between the various demo applications (the radiosity/texture mapped house, the SGI logo coming out of the 2D drawing - that one is in the GLUT demos. the 'stonehenge' demo that found its way into the MSDN CD's, if you really dig deep enough).

Re:State of IRIX? (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922043)

> the SGI logo coming out of the 2D drawing - that one is in the GLUT demos

It's part of the Maxx Desktop [maxxdesktop.com] now :)

Brings back memories when I run it on Ubuntu...

Similar to the purchase of Atari (1)

downix (84795) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920223)

I hear echos of Infogrammes purchase of Atari here, which might bode well if they keep the solid business while reducing overlap and optimizing product lineup. I wish them luck.

First.. (1)

A12m0v (1315511) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920243)

I've learned about Rackable is when they bought SGI!

SGI is not what is used to be. From MIPS and graphics chips (N64 used graphics by SGI), to another Itanium/Windows Server vendor.

Re:First.. (4, Informative)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920687)

Rackable is a small server vendor with revenues in the hundreds of millions while they big boys in that space (HP, IBM, Dell, Sun) are in the billions.

They build x86 based rack servers. They're focus seems to have been in high density rack systems. I think one of their first/biggest innovation was creating a half depth chassis so you could put two servers back to back in a 1u space leaving a hot air plenum in the middle to keep things from getting overheated. They also have 12V Motherboards [techtarget.com] like Google uses on their systems.

The goal of Rackable isn't to sell you one x86 server, it's to give you a solution including a rack full of their servers. That seems to have also been the focus of SGI lately. They went from big single systems to clustered super computers. So the deal appears to make sense. I'm sure there's a lot of good talent and patents that Rackable could use to help it become a bigger player.

In 2007 Rackable's 4 biggest clients [blogspot.com] were Microsoft, Yahoo, Amazon and Facebook.

The name change might be good because SGI is a more recognizable name in the industry. I think some people see Rackable as an x86 server vendor but they're really a server farm vendor.

The past couple of years haven't been great for Rackable with some pretty big losses in proportion to their revenue so they need to make some bigger moves and this might do the trick.

Recognition is not the same as approval (4, Insightful)

SirGarlon (845873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920247)

Although the SGI "brand" is still widely recognized, I am not convinced it has a lot of value. After all, if SGI had a whole lot of happy customers (left) then it would not be in the situation of being sold to WhatsItsName.

I am not sure I would want to chance the name of my company to something that makes people say, "Oh, wow, you're still around?" (especially given that I work for one of those)

Re:Recognition is not the same as approval (2, Insightful)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920575)

Fanbase is never about what is currently happening to their object of worship. Fans are about what was in the glory days when they became infatuated with that object.

I remember glory days of SGI when it was an amazing graphics workstation. I remember looking at stereopairs of new protein folds in InsightII.

They were top of the notch graphics workstations and as a fan I am quite excited that the brand is kept.

Re:Recognition is not the same as approval (1)

mccalli (323026) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921237)

"They were top of the notch graphics workstations and as a fan I am quite excited that the brand is kept."

Me too. But would you buy from them again, that's the thing? I'm also a (mildish) Commodore retro fan, but would I necessarily buy another Commodore? After all, they're still going too.

My own feeling is that recommending an SGI to someone who's not kept up with recent events would invoke either the same nostalgia you're talking about, or a "huh - SGI? Aren't they a bit old-fashioned?". Personally I think keeping the Rackable name might have served better - it's a new name which stands on its own, and whilst it doesn't have the golden halo of the past it doesn't have the baggage either.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Recognition is not the same as approval (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922951)

But would you buy from them again, that's the thing?

Obviously not, since they stopped making graphics workstations a long time ago. Like Sun, they've long since conceded that market to commodity PCs and specialized in servers and HPC clusters.

Correction: Sun does still have a couple [sun.com] of workstations left. But sadly, they're Intel-based.

Re:Recognition is not the same as approval (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 5 years ago | (#27924409)

The difference between fan and non-fan is that when given a choice a fan would forgive a slightly inferior quality in favor of some set "traditional" even less significant features (like "SGI" logo). If new SGI would achieve this "slighly inferior" level in any line of products, I would consider it.

SGI Logo (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920273)

    I hope they keep the logo. I always liked it.

    They just have stylized SGI text at the top of their though. Not that I've ever had much of their equipment though. I had a few machines, but the longest used piece was a SGI monitor (Sony trinitron 17" CRT)

Re:SGI Logo (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920325)

If you like the logo, then you can try the old 'ideas' demo. It comes part of the 5dwm for linux - now called Maxx Desktop [maxxdesktop.com] - along with the old favourites, gr_osview, and gmemusage.

Re:SGI Logo (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920993)

Yes, it might have a good performance and be stable. But, *yuck*, why does it have to be so butt-ugly? ^^
I mean the window border, and the whole widget set look like Windows 3.1, with an even worse color scheme.
You might say it is not that important. And I agree. But it looks like it was intentionally made to look ugly and outdated.

Compare this to my desktop: http://navid.radiantempire.com/pub/Desktop-2009.0-cube.png [radiantempire.com]
(I only turned it that way, and disabled anti-aliasing, to quickly anonymize everything. Usually I just use the cube to have the 4 desktops, and to pseudo-lock the system by turning it to the upper screen. [Good luck finding the custom keyboard/mouse combo to unlock it or to get to a console. ^^])

I am no fan of useless effects. But I must say, the green, semi-transparent summer-park-feeling really pleases the eyes, and fits the early heat of spring nicely. I am an emotionally sensitive person, and the design influences the feeling when I work with something. So no offense, but with the style of MaXX, I would get depressive.

P.S.: Yes, the bottom image is Larry the cow. Bonus points for reading the caption. :)

Re:SGI Logo (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921011)

Oh, and: No, I have no window management buttons. There is no need for them when you can assign keyboard/mouse actions that work wherever you click, and also without the mouse. Also, they are so last decade. ^^

Re:SGI Logo (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921941)

> So no offense, but with the style of MaXX, I would get depressive.

Well, it's still under development...hint hint.

I don't much care what it looks like - I just like how fast I can use it; and I don't mean the speed of the window manager so much as the short cuts/etc/etc, though the speed is part of it too (it's impressive how quick it is in the alpha...I wonder what the end result will be like).

Yes, I can probably fiddle with gnome or some other window manager to behave the same way - I even heard of someone hacking MS Windows to do the same (good luck with Mac OS X though...Apple know better, of course) - but still...

Also, IINM, Maxx isn't just a port, but the intention is to make it better too, so I would imagine all constructive input is welcome - I imagine one of them read your post :)

Re:SGI Logo (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920485)

I liked it so much that every time I was in a headend that had the @home broadband, I would pry the logos off of the SGI rackmount servers. My dell at work was an SGI after that with an SGI monitor, SGI mouse.... etc... I even found a SGI mousepad in the boxes they had stashed in the back.

I watched them destroy all those SGI servers after @home died.. It was a crime to destroy that gear.

Re:SGI Logo (2, Funny)

Mr. Roadkill (731328) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921325)

I would pry the logos off of the SGI rackmount servers. My dell at work was an SGI after that

Soon as I get around to scrapping one of the E250 servers at work, my car is becoming a Sun. I've got an Alphaserver carcass somewhere in the server room, so it might even become a Digital tomorrow.

Re:SGI Logo (3, Funny)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922477)

My daughters Geo metro turned into a DELL powergeo

I removed the big 3" DELL badges from the racks and bolted them in pace of the Geo ones on her car.. She get's strange comments from classmates all the time.

Re:SGI Logo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27923585)

I liked it so much that every time I was in a headend that had the @home broadband, I would pry the logos off of the SGI rackmount servers.

wow... that is so cool. I was one of the engineers who build the @Home Network sgi proxy servers. We bought several hundred of the servers, rack mounted
them and shipped them to the cable headends all over the country.

We also used Solaris for the regional data centers -- those servers came rack mounted, but with plastic panels on the side that got in the way in the colo/headend where they were installed. So, our build engineers would have to remove those panels with a rubber mallet before finishing the build.

We actually wore out a few rubber mallets whacking those brand new solaris cabinets!

ah ... good times...

I've got an old sgi cdrom drive and a dat tape drive (both scsi!) from those servers in my junk room someplace -- they would look nice with your mock-sgi desktop.

I want the chrome cube paperweight. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27925103)

Way back in the late 1990's I met I guy who was a VP from SGI and he had the only real chrome metal cube paperweight I've ever seen in person. He said they were handmade, never mass-produced, only a small number of them were ever made, and they were given as awards to a select few senior management folks at SGI. It was about 3 inches square, and was kinda heavy, maybe weighed a quarter of a pound.

I always thought it was a shame they never mass-produced a cheaper version of the cubes to sell or give away as promotional trade-show trinkets.

Faux pais? (1)

moon3 (1530265) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920369)

I mean SGI is or was an icon in high-end graphics and workstations, not a web-hosting company.

I do not see the connection here. I looks more like the sgi.com and logo grab, but what for? Does it really emphasizes web-hosting in any shape or form?

Re:Faux pais? (1)

bsdaemonaut (1482047) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920611)

Honestly if you check their website it doesn't appear that graphics has been their focus for a while. They certainly don't stress it anyway. They don't even sell workstations anymore: just servers, HPCs, and data storage solutions.

Re:Faux pais? (2, Insightful)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920785)

I mean SGI is or was an icon in high-end graphics and workstations, not a web-hosting company.

Rackable isn't a web hosting company, you are likely confusing them with RackSpace.

Re:Faux pais? (2, Informative)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921375)

They're an HPC company now, have been since Onyx was discontinued quite a while ago. The first generation of Altix had a graphics version (The Prism), but it used COTS graphics cards and was only ever modestly successful at making them work through their NUMALink backplane technology. In essence it was only ever useful because it could have a lot more CPUs than a PC of the day did. It's graphics were only so-so, but it could preprocess a lot of data before rendering it. Made it somewhat useful in scientific visualization. That was discontinued three years or so ago, and was pretty long in the tooth even then.

Re:Faux pais? (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922199)

You clearly aren't familiar with SGI's latest move back into 'graphics' (note the quotes, since it's not in the traditional sense).

Silicon Graphics International? (1)

Roxoff (539071) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920395)

So it's sort of SGI Inc., or SGII? SGI Ltd? So it's _nearly_ the same then...

mistake (1)

confused one (671304) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920441)

The Rackable name is recognized in certain spaces that have nothing to do with "Silicon Graphics". If they wanted to take advantage of the SGI name recognition overseas and within the US supercomputer arena, they should have used it in combination. SGI a division of Rackable Inc. I think you get the idea.

Customer awareness (5, Funny)

BESTouff (531293) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920477)

'There should be no disruption to Silicon Graphics customers'.

Yes. Both of you.

Re:Customer awareness (1)

AceofSpades19 (1107875) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922151)

You mean there is another one?

Re:Customer awareness (1)

Icegryphon (715550) | more than 5 years ago | (#27923755)

If only I could mod you even higher. Thanks for the laugh

If only ... (2, Interesting)

lucag (24231) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920599)

Compaq had changed its name to Digital when it still had time ...

[just being nostalgic and wondering who had the "bright" idea to dump development of the Alpha line in favour of ia64 ! ]

Re:If only ... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27924321)

Posting anonymously 'cos I was involved.

The killing of the Alpha was a rather long and tortured affair. It also was a really sad day when the people who made the decision had to accept that their architecture was dead.

Let's be honest here, I loved the Alpha and it was a phenomenal architecture for its time. However, by 1998 its time was actually ending anyway. Realistically, other CPU architectures like MIPS were chomping at our heels in our opinion. They were rapidly catching up with us in terms of performance for the cost of the CPU fabbing (note that I said cost, not retail price).

We had started work on a next generation architecture shortly before Compaq came in, but we never could quite get the performance out of it that we felt we needed to keep ahead of the next generation of competitor's CPU's. We wanted to define a 5 year architecture; one that could scale rapidly in performance while keeping our development costs relatively low... but as we started to work on it we realized already that it was going to be really hard to create even a 3 year architecture, let alone 5.

By the time Compaq came in, there was already rumbling in the halls that Alpha was in trouble... this wasn't news to anyone. As a result, when Compaq did arrive and told us their plans we basically had only one realistic choice; shutter the Alpha division.

If we'd moved ahead with the next gen architecture, it would've been the Alpha equivalent of a Pentium 4; kludged to improve clock speed at the expense of creating an architecture that was fundamentally a dead end at day 1. Intel could soak this up because of volume... DEC never had a chance. We didn't sell that kind of volume, ever... and we didn't have the marketing muscle to catch up. As a result, we couldn't create an "Alpha IV"... it would've killed us anyway.

In the opinion of those who were present at the meetings when the future direction was set, Alpha wasn't killed, rather it was euthanized. It was better to go out in a blaze of glory than to fade into irrelevance.

On the bright side, many of the engineers I used to work with now have great jobs that they love... some working for Intel, but many working in what they love; small boutique CPU's and embedded systems.

Alpha -vs- IA64 in re: VMS (1)

mosel-saar-ruwer (732341) | more than 5 years ago | (#27924481)


As I understand it, it was Intel who really got screwed on IA64.

Digital -> Compaq -> HPQ got essentially several billion $$$s in free R&D from Intel to give them a new platform to which VMS could be ported.

Which, in turn, means that all those legacy VMS systems can [at least in theory] be ported to a modern architecture.

Bottom line being that I don't think that Compaq [much less Digital] had several billion $$$s lying around to build a new Alpha fab.

Other Flag Bearers (1)

DynaSoar (714234) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920619)

SGI doesn't need to be known as successful in order for the use of the name to be effective, it just has to be known to have a history. People are comfortable with continuity, assuming it means success and therefore reputability. Maintaining the old lines isn't even necessary. Just the name can serve the purpose.

AT&T has existed primarily as a brand name since the Ma Bell breakup of 1984. It gets slapped on top of the various mergers and partnerships involving SBC with more or less emphasis according to the project, to entice the partner into joining? to replace SBC's name on iffy projects? who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of the Bell Systems zombies.

Some Asian company apparently decided it needed such a brand recognition flag for its consumer electronics and began using the name DuMont. We had a DuMont TV. It was one of their last models. They never made it to the color era. I'm assuming they snatched the name because it's trademark had expired and never did a lot of research on the matter. Brand "recognition" would only apply to hobbyists and historians of early electronics and people well over 50 years old.

Re:Other Flag Bearers (1)

sdiz (224607) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920771)

....because it's trademark had expired...

doh!
Does trademark ever expire?

Re:Other Flag Bearers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27921533)

Does trademark ever expire?

Trademark law is quite sane (at least in the US). For as long as you continue using it, it's yours. If you stop using it, you lose it. If your trademark falls into common usage to describe the product, and not just that particular brand of product, you lose it (for example anyone can sell their own brand of "band-aids.")

Logo usage (5, Funny)

Xargle (165143) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920649)

I like this: http://www.rackable.com/sgi/sgi_logo_guidelines6.pdf [rackable.com] ...extremely specific usage and typesetting guidelines for the new logo which are then comprehensively broken by the last page of the same document :)

Re:Logo usage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27920841)

Every large company will have logo guidelines such as this

Re:Logo usage (1)

lordandmaker (960504) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921073)

But normally they make a point of sticking to their guidelines in the document that lays them out.

The last SGI isn't the SGI of old... (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 5 years ago | (#27920701)

As best I understood, the SGI that was bought out hasn't made any new systems with MIPS chips for some time. If SGI is no longer innovating in CPUs then they are just a name in the industry. The last time I checked the SGI web site every new system available was using an Intel CPU of some sort.

I don't know that we need to maintain high-dollar names in that field anymore...

Re:The last SGI isn't the SGI of old... (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922133)

Well, arguably, SGI didn't innovate in CPUs - that was MIPS which they bought and then sold again. No, their real innovation was in graphics and system architecture, IMO.

Re:The last SGI isn't the SGI of old... (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 5 years ago | (#27923285)

No, their real innovation was in graphics and system architecture, IMO

Very true. However, if you look at their current products page [sgi.com] , you'll be hard-pressed to find a system on there that uses a graphics card that they designed. It appears they have become more dedicated to raw speed above other things; though you can also buy storage appliances from them - which I suspect don't use their graphics technology either.

Re:The last SGI isn't the SGI of old... (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 5 years ago | (#27923715)

Did you miss the Visual User Experience links? That's basically using the whole machine as a 'graphics card'. IIRC, SGI's (IRIX) high end graphics was moving that way, so it's not a surprise.

Open Source Irix (1)

christurkel (520220) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921103)

How about open sourcing Irix?

Re:Open Source Irix (1)

solios (53048) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921409)

The one chunk of IRIX that IMO might still be relevant - the thing you got without having to install over a gig of GPL software - was XFS [wikipedia.org] , and that has been GPLed.

The only advantage I could see to opening IRIX would be in getting a peek under the hood to figure out how to get the framebuffers on the MIPS kit to work with the various freenix distros that run on MIPS. My extremely brief stint with IRIX was spent getting a variety of GPL software (from SSH to the GIMP to Mozilla, etc) up and running under some variant of 6.5. I found the then-current state of linux to be greatly superior in almost every respect. The only advantage of desktop IRIX was the framebuffer support.

The server end, I can't speak on. There may be some benefit there. Otherwise, your target market is a very small market of hobbyists. :)

Re:Open Source Irix (1)

toxygen01 (901511) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921553)

It's already available. piratebay provides sources for 6.5.5 too :)

IRIX Rox. (1)

Zerolapse (1552959) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921603)

I am an IRIX user...my daily driver (at home) is an Octane2 and you'll have to pry it from my cold dead hand. But yes, there aren't many of us left. IRIX is a rock solid operating system and I don't plan on abandoning it anytime soon...

Suggestion: Silicon Racks (5, Funny)

berbo (671598) | more than 5 years ago | (#27921629)

That might get peoples attention.

Re:Suggestion: Silicon Racks (1)

p.rican (643452) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922035)

priceless....wish I had mod points for you

Not SG1? (1)

Maladius (1289924) | more than 5 years ago | (#27922011)

I was very disappointed to see that this wasn't a story about Stargate.

Re:Not SG1? (1)

witherstaff (713820) | more than 5 years ago | (#27930977)

Don't worry, Stargate Lost in Space [wikipedia.org] is coming soon.

oh well (1)

stephencrane (771345) | more than 5 years ago | (#27923499)

Was I the only one who got my hopes up that this was going to be a Stargate post?

SGI was once a leading edge company (1)

MaximvsG (611212) | more than 5 years ago | (#27927155)

I'm thinking back to 1993-1994 when SGI had killer workstations that had some nifty innovative features with the best GUI for Unix workstations. Hell, the best GUI for all workstations at the time. We used to manage a few hundred of them along with Suns and Alphas. It's funny looking back that Sun survived and SGI and Alpha didn't. Alpha and SGI were like the BMWs and Mercedes of the workstations and servers, where Sun was like a used Ford. But SGI went to their WNT strategy and took a nosedive. Hard to compete with 2k workstations (at the time) with ones that cost over 10k.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?