On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Dan Kegel wrote:
> (When the two people he was talking to asked about Linux on the
> machine, he said "We feel Linux can't do enterprise-level stuff like
> this." He got a little defensive when we questioned his judgement.)
Heh. If Linux 2.2 was his only experience with the
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Dan Kegel wrote:
(When the two people he was talking to asked about Linux on the
machine, he said "We feel Linux can't do enterprise-level stuff like
this." He got a little defensive when we questioned his judgement.)
Heh. If Linux 2.2 was his only experience with the
jdow wrote:
> Miles, if these babies are the 32 processor monsters that UniSys
> has been making recently there IS interest to get Linux on it.
> But the people I know who have mentioned "interest", mostly from
> a curiosity standpoint, have their hands neatly tied by Microsoft.
> Ya see, the
jdow wrote:
Miles, if these babies are the 32 processor monsters that UniSys
has been making recently there IS interest to get Linux on it.
But the people I know who have mentioned "interest", mostly from
a curiosity standpoint, have their hands neatly tied by Microsoft.
Ya see, the
From: "Miles Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I noticed that this article mentions that Unisys has
> no plans to port Linux to it's "cellular multiprocessor"
> machines. So, I am wondering if anyone is working
> on this independantly.
Miles, if these babies are the 32 processor monsters that UniSys
From: "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> My take on it is that unisys is an example of brain damage
> and it's easiest to ignore/work around them rather than
> trying to get them out of bed with microsoft. Nature will
> eventually take it's course with unisys as it did with Dec.
jjs, you can take
On Sun, 4 Mar 2001, J Sloan wrote:
> Miles Lane wrote:
>
> > http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_0-1003-200-5007472.html
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I noticed that this article mentions that Unisys has
> > no plans to port Linux to it's "cellular multiprocessor"
> > machines. So, I am wondering if anyone
Miles Lane wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_0-1003-200-5007472.html
>
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that this article mentions that Unisys has
> no plans to port Linux to it's "cellular multiprocessor"
> machines. So, I am wondering if anyone is working
> on this independantly.
>
> These systems
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 08:45:43AM -0800, Miles Lane wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_0-1003-200-5007472.html
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that this article mentions that Unisys has
> no plans to port Linux to it's "cellular multiprocessor"
> machines. So, I am wondering if anyone is
http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_0-1003-200-5007472.html
Hi,
I noticed that this article mentions that Unisys has
no plans to port Linux to it's "cellular multiprocessor"
machines. So, I am wondering if anyone is working
on this independantly.
These systems seems to be selling well with
http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_0-1003-200-5007472.html
Hi,
I noticed that this article mentions that Unisys has
no plans to port Linux to it's "cellular multiprocessor"
machines. So, I am wondering if anyone is working
on this independantly.
These systems seems to be selling well with
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 08:45:43AM -0800, Miles Lane wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_0-1003-200-5007472.html
Hi,
I noticed that this article mentions that Unisys has
no plans to port Linux to it's "cellular multiprocessor"
machines. So, I am wondering if anyone is working
on
Miles Lane wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_0-1003-200-5007472.html
Hi,
I noticed that this article mentions that Unisys has
no plans to port Linux to it's "cellular multiprocessor"
machines. So, I am wondering if anyone is working
on this independantly.
These systems seems to
On Sun, 4 Mar 2001, J Sloan wrote:
Miles Lane wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_0-1003-200-5007472.html
Hi,
I noticed that this article mentions that Unisys has
no plans to port Linux to it's "cellular multiprocessor"
machines. So, I am wondering if anyone is working
on
From: "J Sloan" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My take on it is that unisys is an example of brain damage
and it's easiest to ignore/work around them rather than
trying to get them out of bed with microsoft. Nature will
eventually take it's course with unisys as it did with Dec.
jjs, you can take that
From: "Miles Lane" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I noticed that this article mentions that Unisys has
no plans to port Linux to it's "cellular multiprocessor"
machines. So, I am wondering if anyone is working
on this independantly.
Miles, if these babies are the 32 processor monsters that UniSys
has
16 matches
Mail list logo