> A little bit expensive just for playing around. Such oem-/developer 
> kits are as far as i know hard to get. And even if you get one the  
> support is bad. You always have to send the whole kit back. Then  
> you'll probably don't get a real full replacement and the story goes  
> on. Have i mentioned the toll and transport costs each time you send  
> the items back?
> My experience is based on Via Segment-Board. ~450$.
Well, there is that.  $2,000 USD is BRUTAL pricing, and it most likely 
comesfrom the designers trying to recuperate engineering costs upfront, 
insteadof going for low profit margin high volume.
But, that hardware does have potential, who wouldn't want a 32 CPU SPARCsystem 
to run as a storage node or a compile farm on a cheap budget?
That'd be swell!  And yes, the price should be around $450 USD for a board 
likethat.
But the biggest question is, would Solaris run on this hardware?  Just 
becauseit has a SPARC-based CPU, does not mean that the hardware is 
actuallysupported.
For example, one could have completely exotic hardware with a generic 
intelprocessor, and the code for the intel processor would not run at all 
becauseit wouldn't know how to talk to the rest of the hardware.
The user guide for this hardware does not list Solaris anywhere (or at 
leastAdobe Reader couldn't find any references).
If I had a board like this, I'd want it and expect it to run Solaris 10 (not 
OpenSolaris!)and I would, for $2,000 USD, expect that Solaris 10 fully supports 
this hardware.
I don't know about the rest of the people here, but I don't have the full 
timeengineering resources necessary to do the porting of Solaris to this exotic 
hardware.
Any takers?                                       
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft?s powerful SPAM protection.
https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ug-chosug/attachments/20100129/c4114a5b/attachment.html>

Reply via email to