Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Technology (Apple) Businesses Apple Technology

Terra Soft Releases Rackable Dual G4/1GHz 38

Posted by pudge
from the two-please dept.
pinqkandi writes "Terra Soft Solutions just released their new GVS 9000, a dual G4/1GHz 2U rack system. With Mac OS X and Yellow Dog Linux pre-installed, along with the Black Lab clustering suite, these boxes pack quite a lot of power. $3,839 + shipping." Another user adds, "As an added bonus, now you know where to go to find Linux users who look like Cindy Crawford." Yes, well.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Terra Soft Releases Rackable Dual G4/1GHz

Comments Filter:
  • ...and let the DDoS^H^H^H^H/. effect begin ...
  • I am excited and dissapointed to hear this announcement. First, the idea that other companies are becomming interested in apple products as servers is very cool! Sadly, this machine is still too expencive to be practical in any accademic setting, and cheap PCs are still going to rule that piece of the pie... until some 500mhz streamlined sub $1000 rackmounts show up. Remember, the PPC archetecture simply generates less heat and requires less electricity to run, making it ideal for clusters. Come on apple, widen your spectrum!
    • If these can run OSX, then, for all intents and purposes, mac clones are back. Right?

      I realize these boxes don't use any apple (c) ROMs, but if OS X doesn't need them, then cloning is back, yes?

      Could we possibly see some non-apple PPC OSX-compatible laptops in the future? Competition is the american way, remember.
      • No, these aren't clones per se. They're Apple machines that have been re-cased in a custom case. Basicly they buy a dual G4 from Apple and put it in a new case and install YDL.
        • No, these aren't clones per se. They're Apple machines that have been re-cased in a custom case. Basicly they buy a dual G4 from Apple and put it in a new case and install YDL.

          I find that hard to believe. Doesn't sound very cost-effective. (!)
          I doubt apple would hookup a bulk rate for them either.
          • It's how it is done. They get them for the same rate as other VARs, instead of giving you a free printer they jam the components into a rackmount case. They even come with the Radeons in them like the G4 tower. They probably even make a few extra bucks ltting Apple have the cases back for use in refurbishing.
    • by jmcmurry (3759)

      Not exactly what you were thinking of, but you can buy a briQ [terrasoftsolutions.com] from Terrasoft. Teeny little PPC computer that can fit in a drive bay (!). The 500Mhz G4 is $1985, the 500Mhz G3 is $1485.

      This was news to me.

  • now we are sure a bi-G4 can sit into a 2U rack case, does anybody can tell if this kind of compliant rack case is available somewhere ?
    I mailed GVS but I got no reply for the moment.
  • Well, that chick is a bad enough actress to be real...
    (Or just a bad actress!)

    Does your computer "define who you are"??
    • No, it doesn’t. But then, she doesn’t say that, does she? It’s a “reflection” of who she is—I’ve certainly watched the video enough times to be able to know :.) I think this is true of anyone who uses a Macintosh. Some people have to use Wintel machines, say, at some office, perhaps, and can say that their use does not reflect their personalities. As someone who drags a TiBook to every site I go to even though the Rational product I support runs on Windows NT/2000, I can definitely say that my machine reflects my personality.
  • by hcdejong (561314) <hobbes@xmsnBLUEet.nl minus berry> on Wednesday March 13, 2002 @10:34AM (#3156186)

    Rumors on "Thing 2" (a rackmountable server from Apple) have been floating around for some time now. And there's a petition [petitiononline.com] underway.

    And 2U is not enough (or too much...). With blade servers being the new wave, even a 1U unit may be seen as taking up too much space.

  • It's a start... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by frankie (91710) on Wednesday March 13, 2002 @11:26AM (#3156487) Journal
    ...but Apple really needs to get on the ball and put out their own 1U "RacMac" G4 line in the $1500 range. The G4 mobo already has on-board Gigabit ethernet. You don't need SuperDrives in a vector cluster.

    The market is there, if only Lord Steve wants to do it.
  • by navywife (560795) on Wednesday March 13, 2002 @11:44AM (#3156594) Homepage
    OR, for those without the need for pre-installed YDL, you can order it directly [gvstore.com] from GVS with OS X, and save $400. It's good to see these units gaining exposure, but I think the editors of Apple(MacSlash)dot (what else to call the two sites) would better serve their readers by publicizing the source of this HW.


    As far as these being "NEW!" The availability of these was noted way back here [slashdot.org] in a discussion of Mac clustering.


    As long as Apple(MacSlash)dot are posting exactly the same news day-to-day, it seems appropriate that I post identical commments to both sites...

  • The reason that these are so expensive is that Terra Soft must first purchase the G4s from Apple, and THEN do their modifications or whatever and then sell them to their customers. As we all know, there's no "clone" market allowed.

    Or am I wrong?
  • What good is a super drive with Linux?? Seems odd they would force you to buy essentially a $450 useless component if you got the Yellow Dog linux version. Even if you got the OSX server version DVD-R burning does not seem fast enough for server backups, especially automated ones. That is the biggest flaw right there.
    • it's odd they don't pull them and sell on the used market. might not be as salable now, but when only top-o-the line G4s had superdrive, a lot of resellers would pull then in favor of a CD-RW or DVD and then resell them to other users. if you custom build a G4 these days from Apple, the Superdrive is about $200 more than the next cheaper optical drive.... granted saving $200 on a $4000 rackmount device might not be too much, but it's the principle of not needing it. then again maybe with OS X DVD burning it is a valid way toa rchive data? i dunno. i'm still hoping Apple makes a rackmount device at somepoint. as a longtime Apple user (since my ][e) i think it would make the boasting about OS X's power more desirable (and affordable?) to the super users.
    • Sure DVD-Video burning isn't real-time yet, but burning data DVDs from the Finder would be much, much faster. Apple quotes it as 2x. Not that fast, but faster than tape.
  • Hm, these aren't apple products, and while they run MacOS X they the story says they're being sold by a Linux company. Why is this at apple.slashdot.org and not the mother site?
  • $3,839 ??? (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by Perdo (151843)
    That ought to make a screaming fast system, but it doesn't [heise.de]. For god sakes, Apple's performance claims are pure marketing FUD. Get two dual AMD 1u systems with 6 times the power for the same price.
    • For god sakes, Apple's performance claims are pure marketing FUD. Get two dual AMD 1u systems with 6 times the power for the same price.

      Please, we all know that SPEC is designed to compare x86 compatible systems. SPEC tests integer math and perfectly formed sets of instructions. The G4 is a flop monster and recovers more quickly from branch mispredictions than x86 processors.

      Using SPEC to compare a G4 and an x86 is like taking a Porsche and a rocket drag racer to the race track. The rocket car will win on the 1/4 mile -- it was designed for it. The Porsche will win on any track with a curve in it. The G4 has much better real-world performance than x86.
      • What the fuck are you talking about? SPEC runs functions on both the integer and floating point units that are taken from a wide array of common funtions. There's a bunch of crap flooding the waves about SPEC but the whole point of SPEC is you can do anything you want to optimize performance EXCEPT alter the actual source code. SPEC doesn't use SSE or 3DNow! instructions just like it doesn't use AltiVec. The G4 is a good performer but this crap about SPEC benchmarks has become ludicrous. C't did a shitty benchmarking job but it isn't the fault of SPEC or the tests. If you want to blame x86 bias look to the compilers. It's tough to find a proper PPC C compiler let alone a proper Fortran PPC compiler.
    • Of course SPEC doesn't account for SIMD. Not even with the super-duper Intel compiler.

It's time to boot, do your boot ROMs know where your disk controllers are?

Working...