SGI build quality (was RE: great site)

From: Pete Turnbull <pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com>
Date: Wed Feb 13 13:04:22 2002

On Feb 13, 10:34, Tim wrote:

> On an only slightly related note, IMHO the build quality and general
> longevity of Silicon Graphics hardware really isn't what you'd hope
> of kit that cost so much new...
>
> I've seen Sun boxes that have been through the mill several times by
> the look of things, but flick the switch and you're up and running
> (possibility of needing to solder a battery onto the PROM
> notwithstanding.)

Doesn't sound like you've looked at many recent Suns. The Ultra5 and later
are built like cheap PCs. Not at all like the older ones.

> Personal (limited, I grant you ;-) experience of Indys on the other
> hand suggest you need at least 3 candidates handy if you want to put
> together a working combination of power supply, processor and mobo/PROM.

I've not had much trouble with them. I have three of my own, and was
responsible for "tidying up", reconfiguring, and reselling several dozen at
work. I admit the Nidex PSUs have a bad reputation, but I've only had two
(or maybe three) fail out of nearly 100 machines. You do know that a few
of the later graphics boards need 005, 008 or 010 PROMs? Same applies to
certain CPUs (the R5K needs an 010, for example, and that comes with the
upgrade kit).

> Which isn't to say I don't love 'em, an Indy is my main workstation at
> home & the sight of SGI rapidly going down the tubes is deeply sad...

I spent this afternoon splitting an Origin 2000 apart to sell part of it
off :-(


-- 
Pete						Peter Turnbull
						Network Manager
						University of York
Received on Wed Feb 13 2002 - 13:04:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:34:46 BST