f



plz help - the link to HP test servers on HP.com

Hi All,

Can any one give me the link to the HP test servers on the HP.com
I would like to test my application on the HPux server.


Thanks 
VXDISKADM

0
vxdiskadm (5)
1/23/2006 6:13:22 AM
comp.unix.solaris 26025 articles. 2 followers. Post Follow

20 Replies
860 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 51

In article <1137996802.773626.127310@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
 "vxdiskadm@gmail.com" <vxdiskadm@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> Can any one give me the link to the HP test servers on the HP.com
> I would like to test my application on the HPux server.
> 
> 
> Thanks 
> VXDISKADM

And you asked this in a Solaris group because...???

-- 
DeeDee, don't press that button!  DeeDee!  NO!  Dee...



0
Michael
1/23/2006 9:29:20 AM
Hi All,
 Thanks I got the link to the test servers.

http://www.testdrive.hp.com/

Thanks 
VXDISKADM

0
vxdiskadm
1/23/2006 5:34:32 PM
vxdiskadm@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi All,
>  Thanks I got the link to the test servers.
> 
> http://www.testdrive.hp.com/
> 
> Thanks 
> VXDISKADM
> , as I have one, and have owned one before that, so know the machine pretty well. 
I'm sure it would be good for Sun if they did the same like HP have 
done. It would get more people testing software on Solaris.

-- 
Dave K

http://www.southminster-branch-line.org.uk/

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: month-year@domain. Hitting reply will work
for a couple of months only. Later set it manually. The month is
always written in 3 letters (e.g. Jan, not January etc)
0
Dave
1/23/2006 5:47:52 PM
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> vxdiskadm@gmail.com wrote:
> 
>> Hi All,
>>  Thanks I got the link to the test servers.
>>
>> http://www.testdrive.hp.com/
>>
>> Thanks VXDISKADM
>> , as I have one, and have owned one before that, so know the machine 
>> pretty well. 
> 
> I'm sure it would be good for Sun if they did the same like HP have 
> done. It would get more people testing software on Solaris.
> 


The lack of such a site in Solaris-Land probably has to do with the fact 
that you can download Solaris (in contrast to HPUX).

Besides, the market for used HP-RISC hardware has only recently 
taken-off, while usable and cheap used SparcStations were available with 
the cheap availability of Solaris7 (when I got my first 
SPARC-Solaris-combo).
Also, I cannot see HPUX for x86 or AMD64 either.




Rainer
0
Rainer
1/24/2006 11:13:21 PM
Rainer Duffner <rainer@ultra-secure.de> wrote:
> Dave (from the UK) wrote:
>> vxdiskadm@gmail.com wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi All,
>>>  Thanks I got the link to the test servers.
>>>
>>> http://www.testdrive.hp.com/
>>>
>>> Thanks VXDISKADM
>>> , as I have one, and have owned one before that, so know the machine 
>>> pretty well. 
>> 
>> I'm sure it would be good for Sun if they did the same like HP have 
>> done. It would get more people testing software on Solaris.
>> 
> 
> 
> The lack of such a site in Solaris-Land probably has to do with the fact 
> that you can download Solaris (in contrast to HPUX).
> 
> Besides, the market for used HP-RISC hardware has only recently 
> taken-off, while usable and cheap used SparcStations were available with 
> the cheap availability of Solaris7 (when I got my first 
> SPARC-Solaris-combo).
> Also, I cannot see HPUX for x86 or AMD64 either.

We had a presentation by HP a few weeks ago, and I asked about HP-UX on
x86/x64. The answer was very clear: No! Not now, not ever, no way, no how,
no chance. Of course a company can always change their mind, but for now
they're massively behind the Itanic, and will NOT be porting HP-UX.

Colin
0
Colin
1/25/2006 5:06:08 PM
Colin B. wrote:
> Rainer Duffner <rainer@ultra-secure.de> wrote:
> 
>>Dave (from the UK) wrote:
>>
>>>vxdiskadm@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi All,
>>>> Thanks I got the link to the test servers.
>>>>
>>>>http://www.testdrive.hp.com/
>>>>
>>>>Thanks VXDISKADM
>>>>, as I have one, and have owned one before that, so know the machine 
>>>>pretty well. 
>>>
>>>I'm sure it would be good for Sun if they did the same like HP have 
>>>done. It would get more people testing software on Solaris.
>>>
>>
>>
>>The lack of such a site in Solaris-Land probably has to do with the fact 
>>that you can download Solaris (in contrast to HPUX).
>>
>>Besides, the market for used HP-RISC hardware has only recently 
>>taken-off, while usable and cheap used SparcStations were available with 
>>the cheap availability of Solaris7 (when I got my first 
>>SPARC-Solaris-combo).
>>Also, I cannot see HPUX for x86 or AMD64 either.
> 
> 
> We had a presentation by HP a few weeks ago, and I asked about HP-UX on
> x86/x64. The answer was very clear: No! Not now, not ever, no way, no how,
> no chance.

I can imagine how they tried to say that emphasizedly un-emphasized, 
while trying to keep a straight face.
;-)

> Of course a company can always change their mind, but for now
> they're massively behind the Itanic, and will NOT be porting HP-UX.

I've witnessed their show-staff brabble about the upcoming success of 
the Itanic "real soon now" (LW, Oct. 2005, no less...).

While SUN's situation and outlook isn't that rosy ("sunny") either (and 
they had their share of "dud"-aquisitions over the years), at least they 
didn't waste _that_ much money on a "research-project" in such a way 
that the outcome is a product that nobody wants or needs.



cheers,
Rainer
0
Rainer
1/25/2006 8:10:51 PM
Rainer Duffner wrote:
> Colin B. wrote:

>> We had a presentation by HP a few weeks ago, and I asked about HP-UX on
>> x86/x64. The answer was very clear: No! Not now, not ever, no way, no 
>> how,
>> no chance.
> 
> 
> I can imagine how they tried to say that emphasizedly un-emphasized, 
> while trying to keep a straight face.
> ;-)

Let us be honest, a lot of people making presentations have no idea what 
is happing behind the scenes in a company.

It would never surprise me if HP-UX was ported to x86. But they would be 
foolish to announce it now, unless it is going to be ready soon.

Perhaps Solaris will be ported to Itanium one day - perhaps it is 
already being worked on for all I know. The floating point performance 
of those chips really is quick.

-- 
Dave K

http://www.southminster-branch-line.org.uk/

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: month-year@domain. Hitting reply will work
for a couple of months only. Later set it manually. The month is
always written in 3 letters (e.g. Jan, not January etc)
0
Dave
1/25/2006 11:31:41 PM
>Perhaps Solaris will be ported to Itanium one day - perhaps it is 
>already being worked on for all I know. The floating point performance 
>of those chips really is quick.

This was done once and I still have a "Sunrise on Merced" shirt to proof
it.  But I don't think that Itanium is going anywhere fast.

Casper
-- 
Expressed in this posting are my opinions.  They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth.
0
Casper
1/25/2006 11:44:10 PM
HP Supports Solaris 10
Here's something interesting, reported by The Inquirer: HP is now
Supporting Solaris 10 on a wide range of its ProLiant line of server
products. Among other things, 64-bit Solaris 10 is supported on HP's
blade servers and a bunch of other platforms.

That's surely good news for all concerned!
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/dp?catname=%2FSolaris

vxdiskadm

0
vxdiskadm
1/27/2006 3:07:39 AM
Dave (from the UK) wrote:

> Rainer Duffner wrote:
>
>> Colin B. wrote:
>
>
>>> We had a presentation by HP a few weeks ago, and I asked about HP-UX on
>>> x86/x64. The answer was very clear: No! Not now, not ever, no way, 
>>> no how,
>>> no chance.
>>
>>
>>
>> I can imagine how they tried to say that emphasizedly un-emphasized, 
>> while trying to keep a straight face.
>> ;-)
>
>
> Let us be honest, a lot of people making presentations have no idea 
> what is happing behind the scenes in a company.
>
> It would never surprise me if HP-UX was ported to x86. But they would 
> be foolish to announce it now, unless it is going to be ready soon.
>
> Perhaps Solaris will be ported to Itanium one day - perhaps it is 
> already being worked on for all I know. The floating point performance 
> of those chips really is quick.
>
I wouldn't count on an Itanium port any time soon.   Itanium lost 
respect and momentum when it was publicized far too soon and went 
through a series of schedule "slippages" that caused it to be christened 
"Unobtanium".   Recovery, if it is possible, is going to take a while.  
There are good reasons why HP will practically give you an "Ingegrity 
Server" but those reasons are not particularly good for HP (or Intel)!

0
Richard
1/31/2006 10:24:36 PM
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Dave (from the UK) wrote:

>> It would never surprise me if HP-UX was ported to x86. But they would 
>> be foolish to announce it now, unless it is going to be ready soon.
>>
>> Perhaps Solaris will be ported to Itanium one day - perhaps it is 
>> already being worked on for all I know. The floating point performance 
>> of those chips really is quick.
>>
> I wouldn't count on an Itanium port any time soon.  

According to Casper (and he should know) it has actually been done - 
codenamed 'Merced'. But it is obviously not a commercial grade product.

> Itanium lost 
> respect and momentum when it was publicized far too soon and went 
> through a series of schedule "slippages" that caused it to be christened 
> "Unobtanium".   Recovery, if it is possible, is going to take a while.  

You are probably right.

I know their FP performance is pretty good - I've not seen anything that 
can touch them there. But whether that is improving further with later 
versions I do not know. I don't know how the clock speeds have been 
increasing, but if they are not rising very fast, and the competition 
is, then one might postulate that you will get overtaken soon.



-- 
Dave K

http://www.southminster-branch-line.org.uk/

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: month-year@domain. Hitting reply will work
for a couple of months only. Later set it manually. The month is
always written in 3 letters (e.g. Jan, not January etc)
0
Dave
1/31/2006 10:49:17 PM
> According to Casper (and he should know) it has actually been done -
> codenamed 'Merced'. But it is obviously not a commercial grade
> product.

I believe that Merced was the name of the first Itanium CPU.  It may
have also been the codename for Sun's Solaris to Itanium port, but I
doubt it.

rick jones
-- 
oxymoron n, commuter in a gas-guzzling luxury SUV with an American flag
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...
0
Rick
2/1/2006 2:03:36 AM
"Dave (from the UK)" <see-my-signature@southminster-branch-line.org.uk> writes:

>According to Casper (and he should know) it has actually been done - 
>codenamed 'Merced'. But it is obviously not a commercial grade product.

"Merced" was, of course, the Itanium's first silicon's code name.

And we did get it as far that it would boot.

Traces in the web are tiny:

http://www.hoise.com/primeur/99/articles/monthly/AE-PR-11-99-51.html

We had a falling out with Intel soon after that.

>I know their FP performance is pretty good - I've not seen anything that 
>can touch them there. But whether that is improving further with later 
>versions I do not know. I don't know how the clock speeds have been 
>increasing, but if they are not rising very fast, and the competition 
>is, then one might postulate that you will get overtaken soon.

There are many issues with Itanium such as mediocre Integer performance
and the only way to get them to fly that fast is huge caches.

Casper
-- 
Expressed in this posting are my opinions.  They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth.
0
Casper
2/1/2006 9:10:12 AM
In article <43e07af4$0$11068$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>,
	Casper H.S. Dik <Casper.Dik@Sun.COM> writes:
> "Dave (from the UK)" <see-my-signature@southminster-branch-line.org.uk> writes:
> 
>>According to Casper (and he should know) it has actually been done - 
>>codenamed 'Merced'. But it is obviously not a commercial grade product.
> 
> "Merced" was, of course, the Itanium's first silicon's code name.
> 
> And we did get it as far that it would boot.

Solaris 7 was the first OS to boot on Itanium.

> Traces in the web are tiny:
> 
> http://www.hoise.com/primeur/99/articles/monthly/AE-PR-11-99-51.html
> 
> We had a falling out with Intel soon after that.

Intel wanted OS vendors and application developers to support
32-bit native mode on Itanium, to enable rapid application
porting simply by recompiling, without having to wait for
64-bit ports of everything. Sun refused, seeing no market in
32-bit Itanium, which really annoyed Intel. All the other OS
vendors followed suit, and I'm not aware there was any 32-bit
native mode software for Itanium. For running apps/OS's not
ported to 64-bit, this only left 32-bit x86 emulation mode,
which ran at only a fraction of the speed of the then current
x86 processors, and so had no market value at all. So, other
than Solaris, there was an extra delay to get OS's/apps ported
to 64-bit, which Intel hadn't reckoned on. As it turned out,
this became an irrelevance, as Intel couldn't get the processor
into mass production until something like 2 years late anyway.
By then, most of the companies which had bet their futures on
Itanium (in some cases, using Solaris), had to find alternative
solutions, and what market window there might have been for the
processor was missed.

>>I know their FP performance is pretty good - I've not seen anything that 
>>can touch them there. But whether that is improving further with later 
>>versions I do not know. I don't know how the clock speeds have been 
>>increasing, but if they are not rising very fast, and the competition 
>>is, then one might postulate that you will get overtaken soon.
> 
> There are many issues with Itanium such as mediocre Integer performance
> and the only way to get them to fly that fast is huge caches.

The biggest issue is that the volume of sales doesn't even
come close to supporting development of the processor. The
companies with a vested interest in Itanium have recently
shown they are contributing $10B to development, marketing,
etc of Itanium. HP's contribution was $3B (they probably
have most to lose, i.e. their whole enterprise business
when Itanium dies). However, Itanium sales have remained
flat. Other than HP, no one is shipping any significant
numbers. It's looking like SGI's forray into Linux on
Itanium has been a particularly serious disaster for that
company.

-- 
Andrew Gabriel
0
andrew
2/2/2006 12:12:06 AM
Andrew Gabriel <andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> We had a falling out with Intel soon after that.

> Intel wanted OS vendors and application developers to support 32-bit
> native mode on Itanium, to enable rapid application porting simply
> by recompiling, without having to wait for 64-bit ports of
> everything.

That seems sensible.

> Sun refused, seeing no market in 32-bit Itanium, which really
> annoyed Intel. All the other OS vendors followed suit, and I'm not
> aware there was any 32-bit native mode software for Itanium.

HP-UX provides support for 32-bit native mode Itanium softare.

rick jones
-- 
a wide gulf separates "what if" from "if only"
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...
0
Rick
2/2/2006 7:42:55 PM
In article <3htEf.2534$rK3.630@news.cpqcorp.net>,
	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> writes:
> Andrew Gabriel <andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> We had a falling out with Intel soon after that.
> 
>> Intel wanted OS vendors and application developers to support 32-bit
>> native mode on Itanium, to enable rapid application porting simply
>> by recompiling, without having to wait for 64-bit ports of
>> everything.
> 
> That seems sensible.
> 
>> Sun refused, seeing no market in 32-bit Itanium, which really
>> annoyed Intel. All the other OS vendors followed suit, and I'm not
>> aware there was any 32-bit native mode software for Itanium.
> 
> HP-UX provides support for 32-bit native mode Itanium softare.

Interesting. Is it used much, and for what sort of thing?

-- 
Andrew Gabriel
0
andrew
2/2/2006 8:04:31 PM
In article <43e265cf$0$87295$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>, Andrew Gabriel <andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <3htEf.2534$rK3.630@news.cpqcorp.net>,
> 	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> writes:
>> Andrew Gabriel <andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> We had a falling out with Intel soon after that.
>> 
>>> Intel wanted OS vendors and application developers to support 32-bit
>>> native mode on Itanium, to enable rapid application porting simply
>>> by recompiling, without having to wait for 64-bit ports of
>>> everything.
>> 
>> That seems sensible.
>> 
>>> Sun refused, seeing no market in 32-bit Itanium, which really
>>> annoyed Intel. All the other OS vendors followed suit, and I'm not
>>> aware there was any 32-bit native mode software for Itanium.
>> 
>> HP-UX provides support for 32-bit native mode Itanium softare.
>
> Interesting. Is it used much, and for what sort of thing?

Don't know; not familiar with HP-UX, but not too surprising in hindsight
as Itanium is essentially the HP PA-WW CPU renamed after Intel took the
lead role in the partnership to develop and market it, starting in 1994.

(PA-WW is Precision Architecture-Wide Word project -- a reference to its
EPIC instruction set, based on a VLIW architecture.)

So I suppose it would stand to reason that HP would have had gotten
32-bit native mode Itanium code working in HP-UX. Both the processor and
OS were flagship products from HP.

-Dan
0
Dan
2/2/2006 8:30:50 PM
Andrew Gabriel <andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <3htEf.2534$rK3.630@news.cpqcorp.net>,
> 	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> writes:
>> HP-UX provides support for 32-bit native mode Itanium softare.

> Interesting. Is it used much, and for what sort of thing?

I presume so, and would suspect it is used by those things not needing
64 bit or not there yet, just like any other platform. Thusfar, 32-bit
remains the default compilation mode with the HP compilers on HP-UX.

rick jones
-- 
No need to believe in either side, or any side. There is no cause.
There's only yourself. The belief is in your own precision.  - Jobert
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...
0
Rick
2/2/2006 9:09:26 PM
Rick Jones wrote:
> Andrew Gabriel <andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>>>We had a falling out with Intel soon after that.
> 
<big snip>
> 
> HP-UX provides support for 32-bit native mode Itanium softare.
> 
> rick jones

HP painted themselves into a corner when they killed the Alpha processor 
("the Alphacide").  They committed the enterprise to a product that was, 
and is, sinking like the Titanic.  They don't have much choice but to 
keep bailing like mad!
0
Richard
2/8/2006 2:59:56 PM
In article <0audnVtGCM_xmnfenZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
	"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> writes:
> HP painted themselves into a corner when they killed the Alpha processor 
> ("the Alphacide").  They committed the enterprise to a product that was, 
> and is, sinking like the Titanic.  They don't have much choice but to 
> keep bailing like mad!

The Alpha, although the processors were very appealing to
programmers, the systems didn't ever get to the volumes of
being commercially viable. OTOH, HP-PA systems were at that
state, but HP seems to have done a remarkably good job of
destroying their customer good will. In a recent industry
survey, over half their customers believe HP will have
dropped their Enterprise systems in 5 years time, and
they're probably right as the direction it was driven in
is a no-through-road.

-- 
Andrew Gabriel
0
andrew
2/8/2006 8:08:00 PM
Reply: