PDA

View Full Version : Terra Soft Solutions sells 260 Xserve servers running Yellow...


3G4N
Aug 6, 2003, 06:48 PM
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/32211.html

idea_hamster
Aug 6, 2003, 06:52 PM
Oh, boy -- that is just *sweet*!

(Of course, everyone knows that those sub dudes are all a bit off-center...;) :D )

mrjamin
Aug 6, 2003, 07:12 PM
d'oh - just found that story myself. Thought i'd do a quick search to see if anyone had posted it already and you beat me - by 20mins.

Still, that is cool though. Atleast they didn't invest in a load of Xeons + Windows server 2003!

kungfu
Aug 6, 2003, 08:26 PM
I would think that anyone buying an Xserve would want Mac OS X Server. The hardware is nice, but the OS seems to be the main reason for buying a Mac in the first place. Maybe the navy has some special software that is native to linux? seems like it wouldn't be hard to port.

hmm... :confused:

arn
Aug 6, 2003, 08:46 PM
I'm surprised linux runs on the Xserve.

I guess with Darwin, it's hard to keep the inner workings "secret".

Edit: I see Terra Soft has Apple's permission for all this.

arn

benixau
Aug 7, 2003, 01:21 AM
no - XEONS and win server 2003 makes too much noise.

can you imagine the ruskies or chinesse:

found em - ha ha ha ha - we use linux - we is smart - have a listen - <windows login sound> - happens every two minutes - lets party - NO, they will hear us - oh no, they use windows on their torpedo system: they cant even get past the tube opening.

MoparShaha
Aug 7, 2003, 03:31 AM
Originally posted by benixau
no - XEONS and win server 2003 makes too much noise.

can you imagine the ruskies or chinesse:

found em - ha ha ha ha - we use linux - we is smart - have a listen - <windows login sound> - happens every two minutes - lets party - NO, they will hear us - oh no, they use windows on their torpedo system: they cant even get past the tube opening. LOL....I love it!

Gyroscope
Aug 7, 2003, 03:55 AM
excellent news

I can see why are they choosing Linux distro over OSX. They probably don't need all that aqua/quartz overhead for their application. Also read somewhere that linux is still tad faster for server tasks (e.g transaction speed) than Darwin core of OSX.

mvc
Aug 7, 2003, 04:21 AM
Originally posted by benixau
no - XEONS and win server 2003 makes too much noise.

can you imagine the ruskies or chinesse:

found em - ha ha ha ha - we use linux - we is smart - have a listen - <windows login sound> - happens every two minutes

yeah, that would give a whole new meaning to the phrases "blue screen of death" & "my pc went down"

:p

mac15
Aug 7, 2003, 05:29 AM
thats gotta be good for apple, they just earned a massive 1.9million dollars :)

nagromme
Aug 7, 2003, 06:25 AM
Surely Apple didn't hide the G5 from Terra Soft OR the Navy. So they knew the G5 was coming. And the articles says WILL buy--this is a future sale, and we all know G5 Xserves are on the way.

The G5's power would explain why they'd choose an Apple Xserve, when there are other boxes that have nice redundant hardware too, and can run Linux.

So, say the software already exists and is proven on Linux and the Navy was not considering other OS's. They just wanted the fastest Linux box for the price or space or whatever. Maybe they even had a preference for something with AltiVec, after determining that their app could take advantage of that well.

Along comes Terra Soft with a proposal to offer Linux running on a G5 Xserve, and the deal is done!

That's my theory.

rotorblade
Aug 7, 2003, 06:47 AM
I would think that anyone buying an Xserve would want Mac OS X Server. The hardware is nice, but the OS seems to be the main reason for buying a Mac in the first place. Maybe the navy has some special software that is native to linux? seems like it wouldn't be hard to port.

Like the Navy/Marine Corps NALCOMIS system fielded in the mid to late 90's (unix based Aviation Maintenance/Logistics application), it's likely this system is designed for a very specific task in mind and doesn't need most of the features found in a server or client OS.

Even if it's running YDL, the Xserve's 1U size makes it desirable for use aboard a submarine. And with it's computational power, the PPC is a good choice for processing sonar images.

All in all.... good news for Apple. Hopefully, this move by the Navy will help to open some doors (and minds) within the DOD for Apple.

MacsRgr8
Aug 7, 2003, 06:48 AM
WOW. Gr8 news!

It's nice to know that you don't HAVE to use Mac OS X, if you want professional use and support of the Xserve.
This could be an eye-opener for many others!

mvc
Aug 7, 2003, 06:54 AM
Excellent Nagromme - a conspiracy theory involving the U.S Military and undisclosed advanced computing technology. I've heard Echelon/Skynet/The Matrix/Elvis could be using Xserve G5's in a secret bunker at the south pole! :D

rotorblade
Aug 7, 2003, 07:06 AM
Surely Apple didn't hide the G5 from Terra Soft OR the Navy. So they knew the G5 was coming. And the articles says WILL buy--this is a future sale, and we all know G5 Xserves are on the way.
.
This brings to fruition two years of effort with an intense recent six months of research, coordination, prototype development and testing -- a great deal of hands-on collaboration with the Lockheed Martin engineering team.
.
While anything is possible, with a 2 year development cycle and October 2003 delivery date, I'd say the Xserve was going to be used whether it had a G5 or not.

MrMacMan
Aug 7, 2003, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by mac15
thats gotta be good for apple, they just earned a massive 1.9million dollars :)



Thing about it, the retailer doesn't get paied that much only the consumer gets to buy at that Price.

I think apple pulled in somewhere near 1.5 Mill for this and Terra Soft got .4

Could be wrong, unless I have the sales prices to terra soft... who knows, but it is less then what the deal was worth.

mvc
Aug 7, 2003, 07:35 AM
Originally posted by MrMacman
Thing about it, the retailer doesn't get paied that much only the consumer gets to buy at that Price.

No No, there has to be a mistake, isn't this the same military that used to pay $1500 for a toilet seat.

I'm sure the Xserves were sold at a discount price, but Apple probably made $257 million on the mounting screws to hold them in the racks:D

NavyIntel007
Aug 7, 2003, 07:53 AM
The Xserves are for submarines. I imagine that they were chosen because they are compact, fast for their size, quiet, low power, and certainly cheaper that Xeons. Microsoft and Intel were probably scratching their heads on this one.

mvc
Aug 7, 2003, 08:33 AM
Originally posted by JohnStrass
This is also the best reason NOT to buy a DELL.

DELL is also where Satan and very bad people go when they die. As in "Dude, You're going to DELL!":)

beep
Aug 7, 2003, 09:35 AM
Originally posted by NavyIntel007
The Xserves are for submarines. I imagine that they were chosen because they are compact, fast for their size, quiet, low power, and certainly cheaper that Xeons. Microsoft and Intel were probably scratching their heads on this one.

If there's anything an Xserve is, it's EXTREMELY LOUD. They have the loudest fans I've ever heard on anything, unless you're counting jet engines. Whoever wrote that comment is obviously under the impression that Xserves are designed like other macs. They're most definitely not. I would think this would actually make them a bad choice for subs, where it's very important that everything be as quiet as possible. I can just imagine an enemy sub tracking the fan noise of an Xserve.

mymemory
Aug 7, 2003, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by kungfu
I would think that anyone buying an Xserve would want Mac OS X Server. The hardware is nice, but the OS seems to be the main reason for buying a Mac in the first place. Maybe the navy has some special software that is native to linux? seems like it wouldn't be hard to port.

hmm... :confused:


OSX is lame, Unix is long way more professional, I may assume that some Linux version can be too.

Remember OSX is a mix of a simple interface to catching new users mixed with some not-so revolutionary functions.

I still, OSX is not that advance, it is difference for sure and it comes with some good things but compared to OS 9.2.2 I will keep my OS 9.2.2 buecause just the file managment that I use 99% of the time is more efficient in its simple way than OSX. That and that OSX doesn't make any application run faster.

Chealion
Aug 7, 2003, 10:17 AM
I've been reading Terra Soft's documents on Yellow Dog Linux, has anyone here used it?

As the ability to dual boot between YDL and X a viable option or just having YDL and using MOL, is YDL any good?

I guess what I'm trying to ask is, is YDL any good?

MacRETARD
Aug 7, 2003, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by NavyIntel007
The Xserves are for submarines. I imagine that they were chosen because they are compact, fast for their size, quiet, low power, and certainly cheaper that Xeons. Microsoft and Intel were probably scratching their heads on this one.

You can have a dell 1750 in a 1U case with dual 2.8 Xeons, 512 meg of ram, dual gig ethernet, and no OS for 2500. This should be quite a bit faster than either dual config apple currently offers and will run linux.

Of course when the G5 comes out I think Apple will have a big advantage because of the improved speed and memory bus.

jadedchameleon
Aug 7, 2003, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by mymemory
OSX is lame, Unix is long way more professional, I may assume that some Linux version can be too.

Remember OSX is a mix of a simple interface to catching new users mixed with some not-so revolutionary functions.

I still, OSX is not that advance, it is difference for sure and it comes with some good things but compared to OS 9.2.2 I will keep my OS 9.2.2 buecause just the file managment that I use 99% of the time is more efficient in its simple way than OSX. That and that OSX doesn't make any application run faster.

OK. You have no idea what you are talking about. I have been a UNIX manager/OS-level developer for the last 8 years. I deal daily with about 200 machines which are mostly Solaris, HP-UX, and Linux. Throw in some Digital UNIX Alphas in there, and some OS X machines on the desktop. I can say overall that OS X is not very far behind commercial UNIX implementations. There is nothing revolutionary in Solaris or HP-UX that OS X does not have. There are some OS level features which definitely need to be implemented (ACLs as one example) in OS X, but these are not issues for most people.

However, we don't have any servers (production or development) running OS X. But let me tell you why--and it has absolutely nothing to do with OS X. Our applications are not designed to run on clusters--we can't just rip them apart in 6 months and port them to MPI. We don't own the rights to all of the components--and some are only available on other Operating Systems, that's another issue. But the biggest issue is our applications are designed to run on "bigger" hardware-- 4-32 processor machines. Apple doesn't sell them. However, if they did, I'd take a look.

I can say Apple is also making a lot of strides in OS X Panther. I have played with builds...they will make a lot of UNIX admins happy. In my opinion, it is obvious they want to be a player in the UNIX market. I tossed my Sun Ultra from my desk a long time ago in favor of OS X. I'm not saying it's the right choice for everyone or every application. But don't make uneducated comments about your subjective perception about OS X's inferiority. I'm sorry, use OS 9 if you want, but that OS is a joke with respect to Operating System technology. That's what kept macs out of my shop for years.

jadedchameleon
Aug 7, 2003, 10:37 AM
Originally posted by MacRETARD
You can have a dell 1750 in a 1U case with dual 2.8 Xeons, 512 meg of ram, dual gig ethernet, and no OS for 2500. This should be quite a bit faster than either dual config apple currently offers and will run linux.

Of course when the G5 comes out I think Apple will have a big advantage because of the improved speed and memory bus.

In the articles you can see that they plan to leverage Altivec. If they really do have an application that benefits from it, this may make even the G4's a better choice than the Xeons, and the G5's probably even a better choice. We shall see when the G5's ship (I'm not convinced on the G5's altivec performance, yet).

Aron
Aug 7, 2003, 10:54 AM
How odd to learn about Apple's deal with Lockheed and Apple's high-profile positioning with Phish on the same day.... They shouldn't really be able to have it both ways.

NAG
Aug 7, 2003, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by Chealion
I've been reading Terra Soft's documents on Yellow Dog Linux, has anyone here used it?

As the ability to dual boot between YDL and X a viable option or just having YDL and using MOL, is YDL any good?

I guess what I'm trying to ask is, is YDL any good?

I tried YDL on a rev B iMac once. It is pretty good.

What I want to know is what software they are going to be using.

Powerbook G5
Aug 7, 2003, 11:13 AM
The current Xserve may be loud, but the old dual G4s were loud and look at the new G5--whisper quiet. For all we know, Apple has taken the same steps to ensure a silent running Xserve G5. Either that, or, it isn't *that* difficult to sound proof a room or use accoustic cancellation to dampen it.

fpnc
Aug 7, 2003, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by benixau
no - XEONS and win server 2003 makes too much noise.

can you imagine the ruskies or chinesse:

found em - ha ha ha ha - we use linux - we is smart - have a listen - <windows login sound> - happens every two minutes - lets party - NO, they will hear us - oh no, they use windows on their torpedo system: they cant even get past the tube opening.

I have to agree with another user, the last Xserve that I heard was very loud. Just one Xserve sounds like a chorus of very noisy hairdryers running at full speed. Of course, I don't think any server hardware could be described as quiet.

As far as the purchase itself, I wouldn't be surprised if in a few weeks we hear that the purchase has been cancelled or that it is under review because a higher-up in the Navy or someone in the general accounting office decided that they should use a "more compatible and industry standard" PC system. I'm not saying that the Xserve is a bad choice, I just expect that this purchase will face an uphill battle against the entrenched PC drones within the U.S. government.

rufwork
Aug 7, 2003, 12:10 PM
Why pay the Xserve premium and get G4 powered rack hardware to install an OS that's available for cheaper x86 hardware on them all?

If they said they were sticking with OS X, I could understand, or even if they said, "We like OS X and want to keep that an option for our future."

Certainly it's cheaper to get the Xserve sans OS X (from the article -- "We're the only Apple reseller on the planet with a licence to install a non-Apple operating system," says Staats), but I always thought the whole Apple advantage was the way having hardware and OS under one roof allowed you to make great "gestaltic" solutions.

Yellow Dog must be doing something better than Red Hat is. Just not sure what that is. Maintenance price?

tiktokfx
Aug 7, 2003, 12:16 PM
I really don't understand what's hard about this concept.

Altivec thrashes the heck out of any of Intel's vector extensions. Even on a puny lil' 2x1.33GHz Xserve.

You can have a 2x1.33GHz XServe node for $2800 from Apple, which includes dual G4s, 256MB RAM, Gigabit Ethernet, and a 10 client version of OS X Server. Figure that TerraSoft can sell it for probably about the same to the Navy with more RAM and Linux instead of OS X, and you have a faster, more powerful machine for basically the same price as the dual Xeon someone quoted earlier.

Don't believe me?

http://developer.apple.com/hardware/ve/images/2d_real.jpg

If you assume linear scaling on the processor speeds quoted, doing a FFT on a 64x64 matric on a 1.33GHz G4 takes 29.1 microseconds. A 2.8GHz Xeon would take 45.5 microseconds. In addition, PowerPCs scale better with SMP in terms of linear increase in performance than any Intel processor does. So these "outdated, slow" G4s do things in probably anywhere from 50% faster to twice as fast as a top of the line 1U Intel server.

Fukui
Aug 7, 2003, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by rufwork
Why pay the Xserve premium and get G4 powered rack hardware to install an OS that's available for cheaper x86 hardware on them all?

Altivec

tiktokfx
Aug 7, 2003, 12:21 PM
clustered image processing is the sort of thing that makes HEAVY HEAVY use of vector-capable code. Basically these applications will no doubt be nearly 100% vector code, and quite likely be on data sets that will fit very nicely into the 2MB of L3 cache.

Also, regarding the Linux vs. OS X comments, as someone else noted earlier in this thread, these will be installed in headless configuration no doubt, and will be doing NOTHING BUT IMAGE PROCESSING. No need for any of the features OS X has. All that is wanted is something that can load the data sets, process them, and spit them back out to a user terminal somewhere. That means they want the LEAST POSSIBLE OVERHEAD. OS X and Darwin are not well suited towards super low overhead systems. They're great, and Mach is a wonderful general purpose microkernal, but Linux CAN be tuned to much less overhead for specific applications such as this.

VIREBEL661
Aug 8, 2003, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by mymemory
OSX is lame, Unix is long way more professional, I may assume that some Linux version can be too.

Uh.... OS X IS Unix! Ever hear of BSD??? HMMMM???? Linux is too, FYI....

VIREBEL661
Aug 8, 2003, 12:24 AM
Originally posted by tiktokfx
I really don't understand what's hard about this concept.

Altivec thrashes the heck out of any of Intel's vector extensions. Even on a puny lil' 2x1.33GHz Xserve.

ALSO, could the fact that the G4 (& G5) is a RISC based processor, rather than what Intel offers, have anything to do with it?

tiktokfx
Aug 8, 2003, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by VIREBEL661
ALSO, could the fact that the G4 (& G5) is a RISC based processor, rather than what Intel offers, have anything to do with it?

Not really. X86 processors are essentially RISC processors internally these days. PowerPCs are just better designed ones.