Subject: Re: Getting X on Linux/SGI

From: Steve Alexander <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:21:36 -0700

"Christopher W. Carlson" <[email-masked]> writes:
>My point was that SGI is into making hardware.  That's how it started
>and that is still its main focus.  Yes, it is true that our software
>is very important because it takes advantage of the proprietary stuff
>in the hardware, but the main income for SGI is hardware.

How many people buy the hardware and program the bare metal?

>Note in any
>press releases and stock holder's documents how much is said about the
>wonderful software SGI produces (Alias/Wavefront is still a separate
>entity).  You won't find much.

That's a separate issue, which is that very few people here value software.
That will probably change with time if the company is going to continue to
be successful as the industry shifts.

-- Steve

---

From: "Christopher W. Carlson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:28:25 -0700

On Jun 20, 12:21am, Steve Alexander wrote:
> Subject: Re: Getting X on Linux/SGI
>-- End of excerpt from Steve Alexander

Ah!  That's my point.  As a company, the hardware is valued but the
software isn't.  Just because we *give* software with our hardware
doesn't mean that we are a software oriented company.  We are
definitely hardware oriented.

I've been arguing the point that software is as much of value as
hardware for years.  Look at Bill Gates!  He didn't make it by selling
hardware.  Unfortunately, I've finally succumbed to the realization
that SGI is a hardware company first.

So, if one wants to make any points to upper management, it has to be
in terms of "how much hardware are we going to sell?"  If developing a
really powerful *free* operating system, such as Linux, will sell lots
of boxes, you can bet upper management will be interested.

-- 

		Chris Carlson

	+------------------------------------------------------+
	| Also, [email-masked]                                |
	|   Work:   (714) 224-4530                             |
	|   Vnet:       6-678-4530     FAX:    (714) 833-9503  |
	|                                                      |
	| Trivia fact: an electroencephalogram shows that a    |
	| human brain and a bowl of quivering lime Jell-O have |
	| the same waves.  [Time Magazine, Mar 17, 1997]       |
	+------------------------------------------------------+

---

From: Martin Knoblauch <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 09:07:25 +0200

> definitely hardware oriented.

 I have to agree with Chris (a rarely do :-). Past behaviour
of SGI has been that of a "HW oriented Systems Vendor". Which
does not mean that the SW we ship is not important (to the
contrary), but revenue (and profit) come mostly from the sales of
HW.

 Only recently we seem to have discovered that some of our SW
products make us real profit. Now, should we transform ourselves
into a software company? I don't think so. I would like to
see us as a solutions provider (HW+base-SW+Added-Value+Support).
Long way to go for us.

> that SGI is a hardware company first.

 Of course, he did not make his wealth by giving away the
software :-)
 
> So, if one wants to make any points to upper management, it has
> to be in terms of "how much hardware are we going to sell?"  If
> developing a really powerful *free* operating system, such as
> Linux, will sell lots of boxes, you can bet upper management
> will be interested.
> 

  Yes, the almighty god of the Businesscase :-)

Martin
-- 
+---------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
|Martin Knoblauch                 | Silicon Graphics GmbH             |
|Manager Technical Marketing      | Am Hochacker 3 - Technopark       |
|Silicon Graphics Computer Systems| D-85630 Grasbrunn-Neukeferloh, FRG|
|---------------------------------| Phone: (+int) 89 46108-179 or -0  |
|http://reality.sgi.com/knobi     | Fax:   (+int) 89 46107-179        |
+---------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
|e-mail: <[email-masked]>   | VM: 6-333-8197 | M/S: IDE-3150    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+

---

From: "Christopher W. Carlson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:31:28 -0700

On Jun 20,  1:20pm, Steve Alexander wrote:
> >Initially, I wouldn't buy an O2 to run Linux, either.  But, after a
> >while, I might consider puting Linux on it.  If Linux was pretty well
> >tuned (maybe not as well as IRIX but good enough) and I wanted to do
> >some kernel tinkering, you can bet Linux would at least be on a
> >partition.
>
> Why not just a PC?  Cheaper, more expansion, probably better performance for
> just plain kernel hacking.
>
> Unless you're doing graphics things, there's just no point in having an O2,
> IMO.
>
> -- Steve

Yes, that's why I might want to run Linux on an O2.  Since it isn't
even an option yet, I'd run IRIX (if I had an O2).  Also, if there was
some bug in IRIX that kept me from doing something but the bug didn't
exist in Linux, I might want to switch.  It is far easier (and
cheaper) to get a bug fixed in Linux than in IRIX.  Especially if you
can't afford the maintenance fees.

-- 

		Chris Carlson