Re: gEDA-user: Re: Flame about XML

[Dave McGuire <mcguire@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mar 14, 2007, at 9:02 PM, Andy Peters wrote:
> > > I have a Sun SparcStation 10 at home.  It sits, unused.  Every  
> > > once in a while, I talk about it, and I say, "You know, I used to  
> > > do Real Work on that machine."
> >
> >   It's a shame...it'd make a good mail server or firewall for a  
> > home network.  Damn things are bulletproof.
> >
> >   Sure, one could use a recent PC for such a task...but it'd be  
> > larger, louder, run hotter, burn more power, be less reliable,  
> > need a keyboard and monitor to boot, sit idle most of the time,  
> > and be expensive to replace if it fails.  Not so with an SS10.
>
> Funny, I'm doing all of that stuff on the Mac mini, and none of the  
> caveats apply.  (The mini runs a Subversion server via Apache, DNS  
> for the home network, and it's the firewall, too. And it's also  
> working as an EyeTV-based PVR!  And it has a lot more memory than  
> the SS10.)

  Ahhh ok, so you HAVE chosen wisely. :)  The only advantage than an  
SS10 has over a Mini is that they're free, while Minis are fairly  
pricey.  If that box gets struck by lightning (which it very well  
might here in Florida, dunno about where you live) that'd be  
painful.  But still, seriously...good choice.

> When I fire up the SS10, the SCSI drive whines and it's annoyingly  
> loud.  And it's a lot bigger than the mini.  Sure, the SS10 was  
> free, but the Mac mini makes more sense for my purposes.

  Sounds like it.  I'd not run an old noisy drive in the machine if  
I were using it for something like that, though...The machines  
themselves are very quiet, unless you've got a bad fan bearing.

> >   I choose the best tools for the job, regardless of cost, brand  
> > name, or age.  This hasn't a damn thing to do with "purity"...this  
> > has to do with getting work done, and getting it done right the  
> > first time.
>
> I'm referring to Michael's Luddite comments when I talk about  
> "purity."

  Ahh ok, I stand corrected, and I apologize.  I thought this was a  
different conversation, regarding Data I/O UniFamily device programmers.

> >   Not that you care (or even should), but your credibility on the  
> > topic of device programming is just about nonexistent with me.   
> > And that's coming from someone who actually *uses* the stuff  
> > rather than bitching about having looked at it sitting on a shelf,  
> > or having worked for a company that's naive enough to pay someone  
> > (even the manufacturer) any more than twenty bucks to replace a  
> > bog-standard floppy drive.  "Smart engineer" indeed.  The clue  
> > phone is ringing, and it's for you.
>
> Back then -- and this was 1992 or so -- replacing the floppy disk  
> drive on the Data I/O 2900 was, for whatever reason, not trivial.   
> Yes, we tried using an off-the-shelf drive, and it didn't work, and  
> quite frankly, it pissed us off that we HAD to call Data I/O to  
> have them fix the thing.  So maybe Data I/O had some firmware that  
> required you to use their special floppy disk drives.  I don't know.

  Nothing special about those drives...I used one that I took out of  
an old PC.  It's still there, and worked fine up until I replaced the  
2900 a few weeks ago.  It sucks that you guys had to go through that.

> Nor do I know if they've had upgrades since that made it possible  
> to use a $10 floppy drive.

  That is certainly possible.

> >   I have provided verifiable information from first-hand, real- 
> > world professional experiences.  Either provide real reasons why  
> > my recommendation was a poor one, or prove that what we're talking  
> > about is "archaic" despite being a current top-of-the-line  
> > product, or drop it.
> >
> >   In other words...Put up, or shut up.
>
> Hey, I've already pointed out my reasons: we'd migrated to ISP  
> devices, and the little JTAG dongles that we got for free from the  
> device vendors made a lot more sense for us than the Data I/O.

  For the application that you describe, I can see how you'd reach  
that conclusion, and I'd probably reach the same one given the same  
set of circumstances.  However, being in an environment in which I  
need to work with a whole range of different devices, this is, by  
far, the best solution. (Your taking exception to that is what I had  
a problem with)  I reached that conclusion by going through probably  
a dozen different programmers before I eventually settled on the 2900.

> And you've said that you bought your Data I/Os used, and if they  
> suit your needs, great.  I can't imagine that you'd pay the full  
> nut for one.

  Oh God No...Do you have any idea how much those things cost?!  No,  
I'll let someone else pay so dearly to get the thrill of cutting open  
the shrink wrap.  That's just idiotic to me...but I suppose someone  
has to do it. ;)

>   You've already pointed out that current software is $Expensive.

  Yes it is....which is why I paid a premium for my new unit,  
because it came with current software for both it *and* the 2900 it  
replaced, pushing up the resale value of the 2900 considerably.  The  
software I had for the 2900 was something like three years old, and  
lacked support for some devices that I wanted to use.

           -Dave

--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL




_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user