Intel acquiring Pallas

Joel Jaeggli joelja at
Thu Aug 28 17:06:40 EDT 2003

The cost of the os, either of a blessed one, or a roll your own one hasn't 
been a significant factor in our reluctance to use Itanium II.

The lack of commodity mainboards.

The steep price of the cpu's.

and lack of a clear view into intels product lifecycle for itaniumII.

have been issues.

Itanium II 1.3ghz 3mb cpu's have only recently arrived at ~$1400ea. 
opteron 244s are less than half that and that's before we put the rest of 
the system around it.

we have some off-the-shelf compaq itanium boxes to evaluate but at around 
$8000 ea that sort of a non-starter.


On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Robert G. Brown wrote:

> On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Stephen Gaudet wrote:
> > With Itanium2 this is not the case.  Both Red Hat and SuSe have a fixed 
> > cost of about $400.00, plus or minus a few dollars per system.  
> > Therefore, due to this fixed cost, MOST people looking at a cluster 
> > won't touch Itanium2. 
> Steve,
> Are you suggesting RH has put together a package that is NOT GPL in any
> way that would significantly affect the 64 bit market?  The kernel, the
> compiler, and damn near every package is GPL, much of it from Gnu
> itself.  Am I crazy here?
> So I'm having a hard time seeing why one would HAVE to pay them
> $400/system for anything except perhaps proprietary non-GPL "advanced
> server" packages that almost certainly wouldn't be important to HPC
> cluster builders (and which they would have had to damn near develop in
> a sealed room to avoid incorporating GPL stuff in it anywhere).
> > Some white box resellers are looking at taking RH Advanced Server and 
> > stripping it down and offering on their ia64 clusters.  However, if 
> > their not working with code lawyers, and paying very close attention to 
> > copy right laws, they could end up with law suits down the road.
> If Red Hat isn't careful and not working very carefully with code
> lawyers, I think the reverse is a lot more likely, as Richard Stallman
> is known to take the Gnu Public License (free as in air at the source
> level, with inheritance) pretty seriously.  Red Hat (or SuSE) doesn't
> "own" a hell of a lot of code in what they sell; the bulk of what they
> HAVE written is GPL derived and hence GPL by inheritance alone.  The
> Open Source community would stomp anything out of line with hobnailed
> boots and club it until it stopped twitching...
> So although many a business may cheerfully pay $400/seat for advanced
> server because it is a cost and support model they are comfortable with,
> I don't see what there is to stop anyone from taking an advanced server
> copy (which necessarily either comes with src rpm's or makes them
> publically available somewhere), doing an rpmbuild on all the src rpm's
> (as if anyone would care that you went through an independent rebuild vs
> just used the distribution rpm's) and putting it on 1000 systems, or
> giving the sources to a friend, or even reselling a repackaging of the
> whole thing (as long as they don't call them Red Hat and as long as they
> omit any really proprietary non-GPL work).
> I even thought there were some people on the list who were using at
> least some 64 bit stuff already, both for AMD's and Intels.  Maybe I'm
> wrong...:-(
>   rgb
> Robert G. Brown	             
> Duke University Dept. of Physics, Box 90305
> Durham, N.C. 27708-0305
> Phone: 1-919-660-2567  Fax: 919-660-2525     email:rgb at
> _______________________________________________
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit

Joel Jaeggli  	       Unix Consulting 	       joelja at    
GPG Key Fingerprint:     5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2

Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit

More information about the Beowulf mailing list