thelinuxlink.net

Has anyone read the article in Linux Journal regarding this years ultimate linux box? It's pretty ridiculous looking:


It looks like a cross between a pipe organ and jukebox.

They don't mention which distro they're running and primarily talk about the hardware.

Well, I didn't see them mention a pricetag either. I mean, guad-core mobo with opterons? Wow...

I don't know what they were thinking about the design, though. It looks bigger than the old 70's mainframes, albeit a bit more mobile . I did think the whole offsite storage idea was pretty phat though.

Patrick wrote:Has anyone read the article in Linux Journal regarding this years ultimate linux box?
It looks like a cross between a pipe organ and jukebox.

They don't mention which distro they're running and primarily talk about the hardware.

It's funny that they would be so hardware obsessed. Maybe for a Windows box, but it's just ridiculous for Linux. The machine on which I read E-mail and do web development is a 400Mhz K6-3. It has a 14 inch monitor, which I probably only turn on once a week.

My main machine is an Athlon XP 2600+ and vastly overpowered for a lot of what I do.

Well, when you're getting into things like audio/video processing, the extra power becomes necessary. However, I'm sure that system is uber-overkill.

bosshoff wrote:Well, when you're getting into things like audio/video processing, the extra power becomes necessary. However, I'm sure that system is uber-overkill.

Agreed. One of the main appeals of linux is getting more for less. Maximizing the bang for your buck. If you're heavily into audio/video editing a powerful system is definitely a requirement.

bosshoff wrote:Well, when you're getting into things like audio/video processing, the extra power becomes necessary. However, I'm sure that system is uber-overkill.

Audio/video processing is something that people don't use Linux for unless they have no other choice. I'll admit that my Athlon does strain a bit when rendering video, although sometimes hard drive speed is the limiting factor.

Gomer_X this point was brought up in the LJ letters colum last month or the month before. I agree, they should also do a low end challenge. Get a low end machine and talk about how they tweaked the distro and what apps they chose to get the most performance. What was sacrificed for what was gained would be interesting.

Gomer_X wrote: Audio/video processing is something that people don't use Linux for unless they have no other choice.

You're right about that, and it's one of the things that needs to change for linux to be more accepted on the desktop. I know that programs like Kino are making huge strides, but the existing Windoze/Mac software still overshadows its capabilites (while also overshadowing most people's expectations of cost ).

bosshoff wrote:

Gomer_X wrote: Audio/video processing is something that people don't use Linux for unless they have no other choice.

You're right about that, and it's one of the things that needs to change for linux to be more accepted on the desktop. I know that programs like Kino are making huge strides, but the existing Windoze/Mac software still overshadows its capabilites (while also overshadowing most people's expectations of cost ).

I'm still too lazy to get my digital video camera and Kino working in Linux. I'll do it one of these days. The Windows software I have isn't even that great (Pinnacle Studio), but at least it works. In fact I've pulled out my hair more than once trying to get the DVD menus to work in Pinnacle.