I'm curious - I've heard a lot of negative things about Intel/AMD platforms. What about other architectures like PowerPC or ARM from a technical design standpoint?
-- Michael On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Bob Beck <b...@ualberta.ca> wrote: > i386/amd64. Nothing else is realistic these days. > > Sparc64 is wonderful but is basically legacy - it's great for finding > bugs and I use it for hacking but is not something I run in > production. > > All my production gear is i386 or amd64 - with a few exceptions. Yes, > the hardware sucks and the biosen were written by monkeys and have > their fingers in everything making the machine even more stupid. > There are no realistic alternatives. There might have been if Sun > hadn'tbeen so determined to turn itself from a good hardware company > into a company trying to compete in Microsoft's product space (selling > bad bloated software) where they had no hope of doing as well except > in crowds that would buy it because "at least it's not Microsoft". > > > 2009/11/9 Daniel Gracia Garallar <danie...@electronicagracia.com>: >> Hi there! >> >> Now that I have to change my little server farm and I'm able to choose a new >> platform, I would like to choose wisely. >> >> It's a matter of fact that Intel x86 is bogus-prone, and after experimenting >> a lot with OpenBSD and listening about the different archs since several >> years ago, I tend to think that most of the delevopers have a taste for >> Sparc derived machines as being more... predictable. But of course, no >> machine is bug free. >> >> So thinking about security and stability, what would be your OpenBSD >> platform of choice? >> >> Keep in mind that in this question price is not a factor. I'm just curious >> about preferences based on CPU features and their implementation on OpenBSD. >> >> Regards! >> >> Dani
