Archive for February, 2010

Adventure with New Technology

Well, having time to sort through the piles of junk around here, I found another gem, a brand-new PC. Never been run. It still had a factory-installed sticker over the power connector.

I checked it out:

  • Intel Celeron D 2.8 gHz Smithfield? 1MB Cache, dual core, 64bit
  • only 512 MB DDR2 RAM
  • 80 gB SATA drive
  • DVD
  • strange desktop compact case Lenovo type 8994 doesn’t let heat rise…
  • gigabit/s NIC on-board

I won’t even mention the software. It’s 32bit and obsolete. I did not even get as far as “I decline.” Now I have choices:

  • AMD64 Debian GNU/Linux
  • “Accept” that other OS
  • use it as a server
  • use it as a desktop

I am tempted to use it as a terminal server but it lacks RAM. It would be awesome for the English teacher’s cluster. I could add 4gB DDR2 for about $100. That might be a good investment.

We are short of storage on the LAN. This thing could hold two 500gB drives I plan to acquire.

We don’t particularly need any more GNU/Linux desktops at the moment any more than we need more XP machines. 20 PCs are on the way and we expect to acquire 10 more monitors to get some sidelined machines working.

As a server the thing is limited to two drives easily and with a bit of work, perhaps four, two SATA and two PATA. As a desktop, the thing puts out a lot of heat. What were they thinking? As a server 64bitness wins big on throughput. As a terminal server 64bit could make better use of 4 gB RAM.

I think 64bitness wins the discussion. XP should go. I don’t need one more XP machine to manage. For now, 512 MB means terminal service is out. Probably a GUI is out. I will make a file/backup/clonezilla server out of it. This CPU is overkill for that but the students and I could use it for building kernels or other applications just to say we did it. It could compile and serve fairly well. RAM is on the wishlist.

- Robert Pogson

Adventure with Old Hardware

The English teacher had a couple of old machines kicking around. They were taking up space and she wanted them replaced with something kids could use for writing.

  • 486
  • last used 5 years ago
  • 500 MB hard drive
  • 8 MB RAM

Due to a collision with a power pole, I had a bit of time on my hands or these would go direct to the junk bin. I thought there might be some hope of installing software to make them terminals. Neither would boot, so I am not close to finding out what was on the drive. One was DOA. The other would get to the BIOS and warned that the CMOS backup battery was low. I opened it up and could see no battery. It turned out to be a 3.6 V 60 mA-H NiCd battery. I ran it a bit to see if the warning would go away. It did.

Found no OS on the hard drive. Now to find a bootable floppy.

Oops. A car collided with a power pole nearby. The repairmen cut the power in the middle of this, adding to the adventure. Fortunately no one was killed. A stout brace deflected the blow, saving driver and pole. School was shut down as a precaution against kids getting involved and the power was cut off in the evening …

Tomsrtbt should give me connectivity.

pogson@xeon:~$ tar xzf tomsrtbt-2.0.103.tar.gz
pogson@xeon:~$ cd tomsrtbt-2.0.103
pogson@xeon:~/tomsrtbt-2.0.103$ ls
buildit.s  fdflush   install.s     settings.s    tomsrtbt.raw
clone.s    fdformat  license.html  tomsrtbt.FAQ  unpack.s

pogson@xeon:~/tomsrtbt-2.0.103$ less tomsrtbt.FAQ
pogson@xeon:~/tomsrtbt-2.0.103$ less install.s
pogson@xeon:~/tomsrtbt-2.0.103$ su
Password:
xeon:/home/pogson/tomsrtbt-2.0.103# ./install.s

Don't forget to READ the FAQ.

Insert a blank writable 3.5" floppy diskette then strike ENTER.

About to fdformat /dev/fd0u1722
Double-sided, 82 tracks, 21 sec/track. Total capacity 1722 kB.
Formatting ... done
Verifying ... Read: : I/O error
Problem reading cylinder 0, expected 21504, read -1
 FAILED fdformat error Enter to continue...

xeon:/home/pogson/tomsrtbt-2.0.103# ./install.s

Don't forget to READ the FAQ.

Insert a blank writable 3.5" floppy diskette then strike ENTER.

About to fdformat /dev/fd0u1722
Double-sided, 82 tracks, 21 sec/track. Total capacity 1722 kB.
Formatting ... done
Verifying ... done
About to dd floppy image
3444+0 records in
3444+0 records out
1763328 bytes (1.8 MB) copied, 163.686 s, 10.8 kB/s
About to verify floppy image
Succeeded!

Well, it took two tries to find a floppy good enough, but the old box can now be connected using only the floppy drive and the NIC.

I mounted the hard drive and found Lose ’95. It lost.

dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda bs=1024k
fdisk /dev/hda
mkswap /dev/hda1
mke2fs -j /dev/hda2
 

I then went to Rom-o-matic.net and downloaded a floppy image which would run almost any NIC (even these ISA things) and run a script to boot two files from my server:

#!gpxe
  kernel http://192.168.0.29/DSL/linux24 initrd=minirt24.gz rw root=hda2 vga=788
  initrd http://192.168.0.29/DSL/initrd.bz2
  boot

Unfortunately the NIC could not be seen. I added a NIC and it could not be seen. Going back to Tomsrtbt, I found it could see the hard drive and the CD but not the PCI bus nor the ISA bus. I tried DSL boot floppy but it could not see the CD. I then used Tomsrtbt to copy the contents of the DSL CD to /dev/hda2 and tried the DSL floppy again.

dsl install fromhd=/dev/hda2

Now it is grinding away with a blue screen showing an “X” in the centre which I can move around with the old serial mouse. We shall see whether DSL sees the NICs or whether this will be networked via floppy…

Eureka! DSL runs. So far I have the worst display I have ever seen and the hard drive is still chugging after 15 minutes. The resolution is so bad I cannot read the menu items easily. I clicked on “X setup” and a window opened eventually but nothing is visible. Finally, I killed X and configured it manually using xsetup.sh to 800×600 and 16 bits. startx then gave a very nice display.

Then, Dillo kept trying to be helpful but I had to kill it. There are instructions on how to suppress this nonsense but the slowness of the system makes it difficult to do anything. All this time the CPU was pegged at 80%. I suspect the system monitor function was using most of that. I edited .xinitrc in /home/dsl to prevent running the greeting thing.

While it is amazing that DSL fits, it runs too slowly to use the GUI and I cannot get the network interfaces to work, so I will junk these three boxes. Unless I can get 100 megabits/s and connect to the terminal server it will not be useful. I might save the NICs in case I ever see another ISA slot and screws and fans and such. After 15 years, it is time to scrap these boxes. 486DX2 used to be fun… About the only way to work around this problem would be to find a driver and compile it but I doubt it is worth the trouble.

This little adventure has been interesting. It reminds me how far the hardware has come. I will now be able to chuck this stuff with a clean conscience that nothing is wasted. Very few of the parts are reusable. It has also filled a down day with some hands-on work, one of my favourite things.

UPDATE: I finally got it to work. The problem floppy drive was replaced with a unit from another machine and so was the NIC. Apparently the NIC was faulty. The system now works as a terminal at 10 megabits/s and 800×600 quite nicely. I can type 40 words per minute and it keeps up. Redrawing a screen is painful, a couple of seconds, but that only has to be done when opening a window or scrolling around. For the few pages of essay that students write, it is usable. The last obstacle is the mouse. It is a serial mouse with a “wand” and a tiny ball at the tip. It just is not easy to use on a horizontal surface. Perhaps I can find parts for one of the serial mice missing balls. I will be able to use a better monitor with this gadget, too.

Was it worth the time? No. But I had fun, and that’s what’s important when you are any age at all. I am six (decades) old.

Specs: 486 PC from 1994, 16 MB RAM, RedHat 4.2 running X -query terminalserver to give adequate service in 2010. It certainly is no worse than Lose ’95 and much more secure.

- Robert Pogson

M$ Loses XP downgrade lawsuit

Well, the headline at ComputerWorld has it the other way around but you do not win when your customers sue you. The fact that the customer paid more to avoid your product than it normally cost to buy your defective product is not earning points in mind-share. The customer could not prove that M$ profited by the shenanigans but we know the partnership between M$ and the OEMs who push M$’s products profits every time the customer shells out more.

Customers, wake up! If you don’t like M$, stop buying their products. If the OEM forces you to buy M$, buy from another OEM and use FLOSS. Use GNU/Linux.

- Robert Pogson

OMB USA Wants Your Input

Office of Management and Budget is asking for input on the costs and risks of intellectual property infringement.

I offered my opinion that illegal copying helped M$ obtain a monopoly by blocking competing operating systems from the market along with information about top-grossing motion pictures and suffering writers. You should too.

Check it out at OMB.

I suggested that creating copyright and patent protection was enough for intellectual property. Should they do anything more for M$? Look what it has cost so far:

  • sure, billions flowed into the USA, but
  • more billions were needed to fight malware which roamed freely in the monoculture of the desktop PC and patch and re-re-reboot…

So, the USA should avoid unintended consequences and let the market decide.

Update: Shortly after writing this article, a post on The Inquirer reveals that a lobbying group for intellectual property advocates that Brazil, India and Indonesia be placed under scrutiny for recommending FLOSS. FLOSS btw is based on copyright and does assist capitalists making money, just not in the lazy man’s way of watching it roll in. IBM has made a ton of money promoting FLOSS.

Pathetic losers like these if followed will lead to the return of the Dark Ages for USA industry.

- Robert Pogson

Extortion

Well, technically, it’s not extortion if you threaten to sue someone and then demand payment to prevent suit, but it should be when the grounds for suit are baseless. Software patents are vapourware and should dissipate if the SCOTUS ever rules on them.

We read today that Amazon and M$ have signed a cross-licensing deal and Amazon has paid money to M$ for use of stuff in Kindle etc., including GNU/Linux.

  • NDA
  • no specifics on the patents in question

Typical. If you want to spread FUD, this will do. We also have no word on how many businesses have told M$ where to go. So far they have only sued TomTom. United we stand. Divided we fall. That’s the game. If the world does not stand up to bullies they become more aggressive and dangerous. Seeking to diversify their cash cow, the patent portfolio will be milked repeatedly. I notice this does not rate an SEC filing so it is not huge but its FUD value may be much higher.

The worst possible outcome is the extension of the M$ tax to GNU/Linux. That will not happen. Software patents are on their way out. Copyright FUD did not work for SCOG, M$’s stooge. Patent FUD will not work for M$. Even if they somehow play the game out for years as SCOG has done, patents expire in much shorter time than copyrights. The best M$ can hope to do it use this FUD to retain control of the US market where software patents are tolerated. Most of the rest of the world gives them no play.

- Robert Pogson

Reply

This is a post I made in reply to some twit on another forum. It might be noticed more here…


Let see. In 1Q of PC sales, “7″ had a shot at 75 million PCs. According to W3Schools, “7″ share rose from 4% to 11%, 7% of about 1300 million PCs = 91 million including some converts. I am sure M$ is very happy.

However, total share for M$ dropped from 89% in September 2009 to 88% in January 2010. MacOS and GNU/Linux had their shares increase. Oops. I guess “7″ is not so wonderful that folks will scrap perfectly good computers just because XP is broken again. XP has 60% share. That’s up for grabs. 15% of the drop due to XP disappearing went to other operating systems, so we could see a 15% share shift away from M$ in the next couple of years.

Where I work there are 40 XP machines with 256 MB RAM. They are not worth upgrading so they will go to GNU/Linux or become thin clients. They work much better that way. When they die they will be replaced with new thin clients for about $100 each. The cost of a new server would be about $25 per machine, so we will get better performance for a cost of only $125 in current $. In a year or two, the cost could be even less.

Looking at current prices:

GNU/Linux Terminal Server

Item Price
AMD64 Motherboard $100
AMD64 X4 CPU $200
solid case $100
PSU $100
CDRW $25
4TB SATA $400
4GB RAM $125
Total $1050

The more people see GNU/Linux and MacOS in operation, the less they will be convinced they must stay with M$. 2009 saw the netbook. 2010 will be the year of ARM on a bunch of things. 2011-2012 could be the end of the desktop monopoly of Wintel.

- Robert Pogson

Distrowatch.com Stats

Okay. No one is quite sure what x hits per day for a distro means on DistroWatch.com but that won’t stop me from expressing an opinion…

I added up the current hits per day for the top 310 distros in the “more statistics”, 12 months section. The total? 34248 distro hits per day.

If a newbie reads about 5 distros before choosing one, that could mean that 7000 newbies switched to GNU/Linux each day for the last year. That’s 2.5 million converts in a year. These are mostly geeks, of course. Ordinary folk just take their software pre-installed. Assuming there are 20 ordinary folk adopting GNU/Linux per geek, that is 50 million converts. Of course geeks might lead a few to GNU/Linux or they might help them buy a PC pre-loaded with GNU/Linux.

The world is becoming a better place, one convert at a time.

Sadly, I noticed Debian has dropped a notch behind Mandriva,OpenSuse, Mint , Fedora, and Ubuntu. I guess some of us are too busy using the software to make converts. I will have to take up some slack. I will give lessons in installing Debian and .deb packages this semester and I have a stack of blank CDs I can burn. I could get 20 converts easily, not to mention the inevitable spread of GNU/Linux on the LAN here.

- Robert Pogson

ARM at 28 nm This Year

2010 is officialy the year of ARM. They have a deal with Global Foundries to produce at 28 nm by the 2H 2010, in plenty of time for Christmas…

This is not just about mobile, folks. Sure, they can bring about increased performance and insane battery life, but these processors will do justice in thin clients, all-in-one PCs, smartphones, netbooks and compact PCs whose time has come. We no longer need full towers or part towers or mini-towers. These things will be small enough to fit in a mouse or a similar size package that can hold RAM, lots of RAM. Nothing prevents the stick of RAM from holding the CPU, doing away with a CPU socket in small systems. Nothing prevents the RAM, CPU, video etc all going into the display or keyboard.

ATX could be deprecated… except for non-racked servers and specialized video production set-ups.

Did I mention these things are small? At 28 nm the cores will be half the size of their 40 nm devices which are very competitive with Atom. Running GNU/Linux instead of that other OS, these new ARM CPUs will kick Atom with that other OS out of the park.

- Robert Pogson

Making Money and FLOSS

“Rivermuse co founder and open-source veteran Dave Rosenberg believes that while open-source companies can grow, it’s more realistic to see them make no more than $100m in annual revenue and feels that the magical $1bn mark is a stretch goal. The reason? The nature of open source – the fact that code is already out there and you must persuade customers to pay you to support something that their own techies are comfortable with and capable of doing.”

That’s from TFA, “Open source – the once and future dream” , on TheRegister.

Such attitudes miss the point of FLOSS entirely. People need computers to find, create, change, store and present information and anything people need they can create even the operating systems and applications of their IT systems. No longer, if it was ever true, do any corporations have a monopoly on that need and that ability. Businesses can make an arbitrary amount of money around FLOSS because there is an infinite amount of FLOSS to be generated not just the present tiny drop. No IT department, programmer, or geek can possibly do it all. It takes cooperation among huge numbers of people, many of them for-hire by businesses. Many large businesses will find that they need to create FLOSS to do their own work and they will distribute the result. Others will specialize at some level of other to help other businesses and individuals to use FLOSS. No one model is the solution. All models are part of the solution.

The opinion from TFA skips over IBM which makes billions annually from FLOSS. Sure IBM sells mainframes and servers but they also help many businesses create, manage, change IT systems that run on FLOSS. They have 15000 business customers… They create FLOSS. They distribute FLOSS. They configure FLOSS. They manage FLOSS. They do whatever the customer wants. The opinion also neglects that FLOSS businesses are growing at amazing rates. It does not matter that they are small. They will be larger as time goes by and there will be many more of them. Individual businesses will see it is in their interest to create, manage, configure, and to distribute FLOSS, so this is still only the beginning. FLOSS has a lot of room to grow.

- Robert Pogson

Don’t You Just Hate Some Analysts?

I read a decent article about adoption of thin clients in education and in the middle of it all, I read, “At best, the upfront capital cost [of thin clients] is 5 percent cheaper, and at worst, it’s a wash,” Sloan says.” Of course this follows a report that a school spent $15000 for a thin clients solution equivalent to $25000 worth of thick clients. I guess analysts have to make a living, but you would think they would reflect reality. The only way thin clients are going to break even with thick clients in capital costs is if you use that other OS and HP clients and servers. If you use $100 thin clients and good used or purpose-built equipment, you are laughing. At least Slone recognizes that thin pays in the long run through lower maintenance.

Look at some software costs:

TOS GNU/Linux
Server Licence $1000 $0
Client Licence $40 $0

A server for AD/file/print with 2 gB RAM can handle 20 users with GNU/Linux, so the “extra” cost of using GNU/Linux terminal services is -$1800 . Seems like a good deal to me. Sizing the server reasonably scales out a long way. I budget about $25 per user on the server as I save more than $100 on the client hardware because of smaller case, CPU, memory, power-supply and no drives. I can run gigabit/s on CAT-5 if needed so the cost of network upgrading is minimal on any system wired in the last ten years. Take that, Sloan.

The analysts can say what they want. We can figure it out.

“Worldwide thin-client sales grew from 2.9 million in 2008 to 3.4 million in 2009, a 17 percent increase.”
Source: IDC

Although only 1% of PCs shipped are thin clients, a lot of thick clients are being re-purposed and new thin clients last a long time because of no moving parts. 17% growth in a down economy must mean something, eh?

- Robert Pogson

Acceptance of Thin Clients

Over the years I have found the acceptance of GNU/Linux thin clients good because of the increased access (more seats) and increased performance (responsiveness of servers v thick clients). Still, there are many who have not seen this and question the acceptance of thin clients for education or business. I found an article reporting on the results of three tests of acceptance of thin clients in three different scenarios in an academic environment. The third trial, which I consider definitive, inserted thin clients in amongst PCs and provided identical logins and desktops from M$’s terminal services. Thus, the users were blind to the use of a thin client. The machines looked like PCs for the most part and booted PXE etc. and used RDP. The result was 92% acceptance and only the performance with USB was noticeably slower with the thin clients. USB2.0 v 100 megabits/s may, indeed, be noticeable but there are many environments where USB is not an issue at all. USB 2 & 3 are faster than even gigabit/s networking. This would mostly be a consideration for large documents and files rather than smaller, more commonly encountered documents.

Compare that acceptance with the increased performance from a well-endowed GNU/Linux terminal server and there are many good reasons to use thin clients in education. The study noted that users preferred the boot-up of the thin clients because it was faster. Other advantages possible are the ability to leave a session and come back to it later even from another station. This is wonderful for students who have to move around on schedule and may find themselves closer to a different machine when next they are free to use a computer.

For the most part, I have replaced old thick PCs with new servers and thin clients. There is no clinging to the old ways from that perspective. It is just unreasonable to assume any non-profit organization has the ability to replace old PCs with the state-of-the-art new PC periodically to stay up to speed while they can upgrade a few servers for much lower cost. My cost of server per user is about $25 these days, not the $100-$500 cost of some PCs. For that I get the advantage of huge RAID, RAM, multiple cores and gigabit/s networking. I will give up sluggish USB to get those more frequently needed resources. If there are some users for whom faster USB is important they can use thick clients. It should be a minority in most schools.

- Robert Pogson

NEC

I spent some time studying the information about virtualized desktop PCs on NEC’s site. They describe the configurations and advantages and disadvantages very clearly. It is worth visiting if
you are curious about how they do it.

I was puzzled by several things:

  • NECs graphics suggests the “initial cost” of a virtual PC setup is less than the cost of doing the same thing with thin clients and that the regular business PC had a lower initial cost than even a thin client
  • NECs graphics suggests the power consumption of a virtual PC setup is less than the power consumption using thin clients

I am assuming that ordinary thin clients connected to a terminal server are the basis of this comparison. As the server for the virtual PCs has to have more resources per PC than a terminal server, I do not understand how this can be. Each virtual PC has RAM for the guest OS in a virtual machine which amounts to 256MB or more these days. That memory multiplied by hundreds or thousands of units amounts to something. Similarly, one needs more servers to run the same number of seats this way with a given amount of RAM so I cannot see how the power consumption can be less unless that depends on maintaining a high load factor dynamically. Being able to slide the session to another server “live” is an advantage and could cause power savings.

As an example, suppose we have a server with 64 gB RAM and we allocate 1 gB per virtual PC. We can then run 64 users and their virtual PCs on the one server. As a terminal server, we could allocate 1gB to the OS and use 128 MB per user for their data and put 504 users on one server for the same power consumption and initial server cost. That’s how it might work with a ‘NIX OS with shared memory. If one does not have the ability to share resources like libraries and executables, they are stuck. That is what they are doing, using XP Pro. We might not stick 504 users on that server, but we certainly could run far more than 64 average point-click-gawk users on it.

It could be the licensing costs for that other OS defeat the advantages of thin clients for that other OS. A hefty licence for the server, a CAL for each seat and a licence for the OS on the terminal means you are paying three times for the same thing.

Here is a prime example of the burden M$ puts on IT. If you use M$’s software, you get no benefit from the new technology. (Thin client is not new but 64gB on a server is something affordable these days.) I see this all the time in schools. Add up all the RAM on the thick clients and you can run far more users than if it were on a GNU/Linux terminal server instead. The last place I worked had 1 gB per XP machine. That is 24 gB in the lab. I could easily have run the lab on 2gB on the server. RAM is not that expensive but every server has its limits and a server with double the slots is much more expensive.

NEC, sadly, tries to discourage potential customers from using GNU/Linux instead of welcoming them to twice the benefit from using GNU/Linux and thin clients instead of that other OS.

Perhaps for some customers this seems like a good deal but while it may reduce some operating costs v thick clients and a file server/authentication server it is not even close to being cost-competitive with a ‘NIX OS on thin clients.

- Robert Pogson



Archives by Month

My Mission

My observations and opinions about IT are based on 40 years of use in science and technology and lately, in education. I like IT that is fast, cost-effective and reliable. I do not care whether my solution is the same as yours. I like to think for myself.

My first use of GNU/Linux in 2001 was so remarkably better than what I had been using, I feel it is important work to share GNU/Linux with the world. I have been blessed by working in schools where students and school systems have benefited by good, modular software easily installed in most systems.

I have shown GNU/Linux to thousands of students and hundreds of teachers over the years and will continue in some way doing that until I die in spite of the opposition.

Posts

February 2010
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28  

    Writing

    2488 articles
    18599 comments

      Comments

      platforms
      linux 10349
      windows 8015
      macos 107
      wp 2
      sun 0

      browsers
      firefox 14332 
      safari 7212 
      chrome 7166 
      ie 2724 
      iceweasel 2035 
      opera 1232 
      konqueror 198 
      netnewswire 7 
      flock 0 
      lynx 0 
      bonecho 0 
      epiphany 0