DoN. Nichols wrote:

Hi Don,

My recollection is that the Ultra 5, Ultra 10 and Blade 100 are all
slower that a maximum specification Ultra 2. I think many people thought
that the machines with higher model numbers would be faster, when
actually they were not. For its time, the Ultra 2 was a very fast machine.


O.K. Ultra-2 CPUs available:

167 MHz
200 MHz
250 MHz
300 MHz
360 MHz (Ultra 60 only)
400 MHz
450 MHz (Ultra 60 only)

Ultra-5, Ultra-10 CPUs available:
270 MHz (Ultra 5)
300 MHz (Ultra 10)
333 MHz (Ultra-5, 10)
360 MHz (Ultra-5, 10)
400 MHz (Ultra-5)
440 MHz (Ultra-10)

So a single threaded process can run faster on the Ultra-10 than
on the Ultra-2, and equally fast on the Ultra-5 -- assuming that CPU
speed is the only limiting factor. Ultra 60 can go a bit faster than
the fastest Ultra-10.

Perhaps so, but even with a single threaded process the edge is not
great. And I think that is the only way you can make an Ultra 5 or 10
look faster than an Ultra 2. In many applications, the extra RAM and
faster disks of the Ultra 2 will more than make up for it. You can have
two 400 MHz processors, too.

My experience was that Ultra 5 and 10 machines always seemed
considerably slower than my Ultra 2. But they were not my machines (they
were the ones which were once abundant at MIT) so I don't know what
specification they were.

All in all, the Ultra 5 and 10 strike me as being the budget machines of
the era, whereas the Ultra 2 was for people with deep pockets.

But The Sun Blade 1000 and 2000 series started at 600 MHz, then
750, 900, then the switch to Cu (copper conductors in the chip instead
of aluminum) 900, 1050, and 1200 MHz.

Of course -- the Ultra-5 and Ultra-10 have the slower IDE bus
instead of a nice fast SCSI bus.

[ ... ]


True enough. A few years back I was given one of those monitors and I
carried it about 1/4 mile home. It nearly killed me :-).


It *would* have killed me -- to carry it that far. I'm an old
phart these days. :-)

Fortunately I've got space to put my monitor next to the Ultra 2, rather
than on top of it. Instead, I end up piling CD-Roms and books on top :-).


That helps. The CD-ROMs and books can be moved one or two at
a time, so the total weight is a lot less. :-)

The worst is when I try to move the pile of CD-Roms at once, and they
topple and fall on the floor.

Probably so. I've gotten an Ultra-2 (back when I was using
them) from a local used computer vendor for something like $50.00 US.

Well, I think I scored a good deal:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...m=260318379668


O.K. Looks nice -- as long as the description given is the
actual configuration, rather than a listing of the manufacturer's
maximum which I have seen in some auctions.

Disks are small -- but no problem if you have others to swap in.

However -- I don't see a mention of the framebuffer, which may
mean that it is an "Enterprise" version -- no framebuffer, intended to
be a server, and the console is a serial terminal connected to TTYA.


Even with the shipping (which is a bit overpriced, but given the low
opening bid I wasn't worried) it's less than $50.


:-) (Of course, several years after my $50.00 Ultra-2. :-)


It hasn't arrived yet, so there are still ways in which the deal could
turn bad, but I'm hopeful that this will be an economical solution.

Well sadly the deal found a way to turn bad on me. The seller didn't
pack it well enough, so it now has a crack in the front. One of the
disks won't come out of its bay either, so I suspect there's a little
distortion in the chassis.

I guess it is partly my fault for being cheap. I should have gone back
to a vendor I've used in the past who ships machines with six inches of
packaging, but he was asking more than twice the price. I wish I had
gone to him. I wouldn't have regretted it. I even hinted that the
machine was fairly fragile in my e-mail to the seller, and thought that
his high delivery charge would pay for some decent packaging, but it
seems he didn't have the common sense to pack it well. As someone once
said to me, the irony of common sense is that it isn't that common.

On the plus side, the machine works and has a genuine 2048 MB RAM, so it
will satisfy my needs. I'm just a little upset as the damage was avoidable.

The lack of a framebuffer means that you will have to swap in
one from your current system.

There is a framebuffer in the machine, just not a good one. It's an LSI
SBus framebuffer. But I have a spare Creator 3D, so it doesn't matter.

And the access to the less expensive units falls victim to the
costs of shipping across the pond.

What speed CPUs are you running on your Ultra-2? You can move
them into the Ultra-60 if you want to.

At the moment I've got the following in my Ultra 2:

* 2 x 400 MHz processors


O.K. The max.


* 1280 MB RAM


Can be expanded -- with the replacement system.

Indeed, one thing I'm pleased about.

* 2 x 36 GB hard disks


Better than the drives in the auction system.


* 32x CD-Rom


O.K. Not a DVD ROM then. I can't be sure what is in your
auction machine. The DVD-ROM would be nicer -- especially when
installing the latest Solaris 10 U6

The CD-Rom seems bad. Full of dust and rattling. I have Solaris 9 on
CD-Roms, so I don't have much use for a DVD-Rom drive. I tried Solaris
10, but hated the version of GNOME which was included, and finding the
version I liked was not straightforward. I know that many people despise
all versions of GNOME, but I like version 2.0.2. To me it is the right
compromise between efficiency and ease of use. The version shipped with
Solaris 10 had many features I'd never use, font anti-aliasing (why
anyone thinks this is better than bitmap fonts I don't know, it just
looks blurry) and a very unstable version of Nautilus. It just looked
more trouble than it was worth.

One of the good things about the Ultra 2 I've bought on eBay is that it
has 2 GB of RAM. Not that I'm convinced that this will speed the machine
up a lot, but it's something I've yet to acquire.


If you do memory intensive things -- like image processing, the
more RAM the better.

I do lots of image processing with scans from film. Usually big scans. I
notice that when I put a CD of scans in the machine, it loads them all
into RAM. It must do because after Nautilus has created thumbnails, I
can copy a full CD to my hard disk in a few seconds.

As for moving the Ultra 2 processors into an Ultra 60, I have been
variously told that:

* You can.
* You can't.
* Sun says you can't, but actually it works.


I believe that the third one is correct, based on past postings
in comp.sys.sun.hardare.

Right. So I could keep the processors and disks, but not the RAM? At
least, I don't think the RAM is compatible. One day I may get an Ultra 60...


I have not looked at an Ultra 60 closely enough to know if it uses the
same processor slot, as I don't know anyone who owns one.


I do own both machines, and they do use the same slot. Since
both of my Ultra-60 machines came with two 450 MHz CPUs, I did not have
any reason to move the 400 MHz ones from the Ultra-2 into the Ultra-60.


But I don't
think I've ever heard of an Ultra 60 with 400 MHz processors.


My Sun FEH (Field Engineer's Handbook) says that there were 400
MHz CPUs for the Ultra-60. (501-5446 and 501-5500), while the ones for
the Ultra-2 were 501-5445 (one lower than the first of the Ultra-60
ones). The Ultra-2 ones had 2MB Cache, and the Ultra-60 ones had 4MB
Cache.

The 300 MHz CPUs (in both systems) had problems co-existing with
one version of the Creator-3D framebuffers.


They all
seem to be 360 or 450 MHz. I'm pretty sure that the hard disks can be
interchanged, though.


Yes, no, and maybe. :-) It depends on the direction. All use
the SCA 80-pin interface. The Ultra-2 has clearance only for 1" high
drives, while the drive bay in the Ultra-60 can handle 1.6" drives with
no problems.

In my case, that would be no problem. I only have 1" high drives.

Incidentally, I have more 300 MHz Ultra 2 processors than I know what to
do with, if you know of anyone who wants some.


Given the poor cooperation with the Creator-3D, I don't think
that I do. :-)


I am not sure whether to pull the NVRAM chip from this new machine and
plug it into my existing machine, or whether to take my disks and SBus
cards from the existing machine and put them into the new machine. The
former is much less work, but the latter seems a safer bet. Any thoughts?


First -- just try bringing the system up as it is shipped. It
appears to have some version of Solaris pre-loaded, though it is not
clear which version. I have my doubts about a fill load of Solaris 10
with only two 9GB drives. :-) But this will tell you whether the
computer *as shipped* works, before you change anything. If it does not
have a framebuffer, you'll want a null modem cable between the new
machine's TTYA and one of the two TTY ports on your old machine, just so
you can see what it says during boot -- including total memory
installed. If your old machine won't work well enough -- you can use a
PC or a stand-alone terminal for seeing what it does.

I think that because of the case damage, I want to move the parts into
my old case. Is the any risk involved in just swapping the NVRAM chips?
Fortunately the new machine keeps time when powered off.

I hope that you don't have any licensed software installed, as
that is keyed to the hostid (and possibly the MAC address) in the NVRAM,
and IIRC you were having problems with your current NVRAM.

I don't have any licenced software.

Once it passes that test, then you can see what else to move.
CPUs (move in pairs), framebuffer (if the new one does not have one),
disks, and any sBus cards which may be of utility.

It is a pity that the vendor in the auction did not feel it worth
while to put up a bigger image -- and one of the back as well.

I rather regret buying from this guy, but was just trying to save money.
At least the machine is still good for parts.

What does RTB stand for in

"The unit comes with 30 days RTB warranty."? I hope
that it is saying that you can return it if it does not work. (Though
at that prince -- it is worth it for parts. :-)

I believe it stands for "return to base". That is, the buyer has to pay
the cost of returning it. So a way of making the warranty less
worthwhile for the customer and cheaper for the vendor.

Anyway -- first time you boot it -- write down the hostid and
the MAC address -- to put into the other NVRAM after surgery to give it
a fresh battery.

[ ... ]


The Sun Type 5 keyboard is the best I have ever seen. I have heard that
the later keyboards are less solid. I don't want to lose that great
keyboard.


I like the Type-6 keyboard, which has a clip-on shelf on the
near side of the spacebar which serves nicely as a wrist rest when
typing in my reclining chair with the keyboard in my lap (which is how I
normally type.)

They were still grey/cream keyboards, weren't they?


Yes. I don't use the Sun USB mouse, however. this finally
allows me to use the Logitech "Trackman Wheel" trackball -- much easier
to use on the arm of my chair. Anything which needs a mouse pad does
not work well on the chair arm. :-)


I don't think I've
tried the later grey/cream keyboard. But I tried a blue one and hated it.


I've never had a blue one to try. Is that the Type-7?

Not sure. It was current in late 2003 or early 2004, if that helps.

The final batch (lenses and spare bodies) was in exchange for a
50mm f0.95 for the Cannon-7 rangefinder. He found the camera to fit the
lens before I found one. I got the lens at a hamfest for about $15.00
many years ago. I did make a mount for the lens, and tried it on a
vidicon at work for a project -- and it was quite soft and prone to
flare -- but it was *still* fast. :-)

Sounds like an interesting lens. However, I get the impression that many
purchases of the fastest lenses were influenced to some degree by their
poser value. I don't imagine that too many people regularly used those
lenses wide open :-).


Well ... if I had the camera body to fit it, I would have used
it. I tended to do a lot of low-light shots without flash to avoid
calling attention to myself.

The D70 (digital Nikon) has the advantage that it will start at
200 ISO (ASA), and work its way up to 1600 ISO if needed to keep the
shutter speed reasonable. And while the image is a bit noisier at 1600
ISO, it is not as bad as the grain in a color slide or negative film
pushed to 1600 ASA. :-) Most of the time, I don't need faster than the
f:3.5 on the zoom lenses which I use -- though I have the 50mm f:1.4
autofocus, and a 180mm f2.8 which has been coverted to add a chip so it
will handle auto-exposure properly, even though it does not have
autofocus.

I rarely use my fastest lenses for hand-held low light photography. What
I do use them for is getting a nice blurred background, though. My
recollection is that a somewhat patterned background can still show at
about f/3.5 to f/4.

Many thanks for the help.

Best wishes,

Chris

On 2008-11-28, Christopher Tidy wrote:
DoN. Nichols wrote:

Hi Don,

My recollection is that the Ultra 5, Ultra 10 and Blade 100 are all
slower that a maximum specification Ultra 2. I think many people thought
that the machines with higher model numbers would be faster, when
actually they were not. For its time, the Ultra 2 was a very fast machine.


O.K. Ultra-2 CPUs available:

[ ... ]

400 MHz

[ ... ]


Ultra-5, Ultra-10 CPUs available:

[ ... ]

400 MHz (Ultra-5)
440 MHz (Ultra-10)

So a single threaded process can run faster on the Ultra-10 than
on the Ultra-2, and equally fast on the Ultra-5 -- assuming that CPU
speed is the only limiting factor. Ultra 60 can go a bit faster than
the fastest Ultra-10.

Perhaps so, but even with a single threaded process the edge is not
great. And I think that is the only way you can make an Ultra 5 or 10
look faster than an Ultra 2. In many applications, the extra RAM and
faster disks of the Ultra 2 will more than make up for it. You can have
two 400 MHz processors, too.

That is why I mentioned "single-threaded". :-)

My experience was that Ultra 5 and 10 machines always seemed
considerably slower than my Ultra 2. But they were not my machines (they
were the ones which were once abundant at MIT) so I don't know what
specification they were.

Probably the 'tute got them early in the lifetime, and they were
minimum memory and slowest CPUs. :-)

All in all, the Ultra 5 and 10 strike me as being the budget machines of
the era, whereas the Ultra 2 was for people with deep pockets.

Certainly the Ultra-5 and Ultra-10 were not the same build
quality as the Ultra-2, the Ultra-60, The Sun-Fire 280R and the Sun
Blade [12]000 (just listing the ones which I have personal experience
with.

However, I am running two Ultra-10s (as web servers -- I don't
need the speed of the Sun Blades, nor do I need the power consumption of
those later machines. The Ultra-10 is cheaper to run than the Ultra-2,
or any of the other really nice machines.

I'm also running an Ultra-5 (with a QFE card (quad fast
ethernet) as a firewall. Again -- I don't have enough bandwidth through
my T1 to need a faster system there.

So -- the Ultra-5 and Ultra-10 get used for things where they
save me money -- twice -- direct power consumption, and air conditioning
to deal with the heat buildup.

[ ... ]

That helps. The CD-ROMs and books can be moved one or two at
a time, so the total weight is a lot less. :-)

The worst is when I try to move the pile of CD-Roms at once, and they
topple and fall on the floor.

Been there. :-)

[ ... ]

It hasn't arrived yet, so there are still ways in which the deal could
turn bad, but I'm hopeful that this will be an economical solution.

Well sadly the deal found a way to turn bad on me. The seller didn't
pack it well enough, so it now has a crack in the front. One of the
disks won't come out of its bay either, so I suspect there's a little
distortion in the chassis.

Hmm ... likely so.

I guess it is partly my fault for being cheap. I should have gone back
to a vendor I've used in the past who ships machines with six inches of
packaging, but he was asking more than twice the price. I wish I had
gone to him. I wouldn't have regretted it. I even hinted that the
machine was fairly fragile in my e-mail to the seller, and thought that
his high delivery charge would pay for some decent packaging, but it
seems he didn't have the common sense to pack it well. As someone once
said to me, the irony of common sense is that it isn't that common.

Agreed.

On the plus side, the machine works and has a genuine 2048 MB RAM, so it
will satisfy my needs. I'm just a little upset as the damage was avoidable.

O.K.

if it were not for the frame distortion, you could simply swap
covers from the old machine to the new one. As it is, you now need to
transfer RAM (at least part of it), the NVRAM, and probably not much
else to the old machine.

The lack of a framebuffer means that you will have to swap in
one from your current system.

There is a framebuffer in the machine, just not a good one. It's an LSI
SBus framebuffer. But I have a spare Creator 3D, so it doesn't matter.

O.K. And aside from that -- are you going to be using the
machine as anything other than a parts donor?

And which version of Solaris is installed in it?

[ ... ]

* 1280 MB RAM


Can be expanded -- with the replacement system.

Indeed, one thing I'm pleased about.

* 2 x 36 GB hard disks


Better than the drives in the auction system.


* 32x CD-Rom


O.K. Not a DVD ROM then. I can't be sure what is in your
auction machine. The DVD-ROM would be nicer -- especially when
installing the latest Solaris 10 U6

The CD-Rom seems bad. Full of dust and rattling. I have Solaris 9 on
CD-Roms, so I don't have much use for a DVD-Rom drive.

Solaris 9 came with both a DVD-ROM and a set of CD-ROMs for the
systems which did not have a DVD-ROM drive installed.

I tried Solaris
10, but hated the version of GNOME which was included, and finding the
version I liked was not straightforward.

Was the source for the older GNUME not in the Solaris 9
"Software Companion" CD-ROM? That could be transferred to the
Solaris-10 system and compiled to replace the newer GNOME.

I know that many people despise
all versions of GNOME,

I've never usd it -- other than once booting into it for a
trial. I opted to stay with CDE for as long as I can. And it is still
present in Solaris 10 at least.

but I like version 2.0.2. To me it is the right
compromise between efficiency and ease of use. The version shipped with
Solaris 10 had many features I'd never use, font anti-aliasing (why
anyone thinks this is better than bitmap fonts I don't know, it just
looks blurry) and a very unstable version of Nautilus. It just looked
more trouble than it was worth.

:-)

One of the good things about the Ultra 2 I've bought on eBay is that it
has 2 GB of RAM. Not that I'm convinced that this will speed the machine
up a lot, but it's something I've yet to acquire.


If you do memory intensive things -- like image processing, the
more RAM the better.

I do lots of image processing with scans from film. Usually big scans. I
notice that when I put a CD of scans in the machine, it loads them all
into RAM. It must do because after Nautilus has created thumbnails, I
can copy a full CD to my hard disk in a few seconds.

O.K. Plenty of benefit from the added RAM then.

As for moving the Ultra 2 processors into an Ultra 60, I have been
variously told that:

* You can.
* You can't.
* Sun says you can't, but actually it works.


I believe that the third one is correct, based on past postings
in comp.sys.sun.hardare.

Right. So I could keep the processors and disks,

You could -- but if the Ultra-60 comes with the dual 450 MHz
ones, why bother? and -- you could use 1.6" high drives for greater
capacity if you needed in the Ultra-60.

(Note that there is also a less common Ultra-30 which
is identical to the Ultra-60 except that it has a slot for only
one CPU module.)

but not the RAM? At
least, I don't think the RAM is compatible. One day I may get an Ultra 60...

The RAM is the same 501-???? numbers with the exception of
501-2479 (16 MB per DIMM -- the smallest) which is only listed for the
Ultra-2. I don't know whether it would work in the Ultra-60, but you
don't have any of those anyway. Your full 2GB of RAM would fit and work
fine in the Ultra-60. All of this compatibility is why I have been
suggesting the Ultra-60 to you. Moving to a Sun Blade 1000 or Sun Blade
2000 would mean:

1 Different CPU modules -- not interchangability (but why would
you want to use 400 MHz CPUs in a machine which comes with up
to 1200 MHz CPUs? :-)

2) Different DIMM modules -- maximum is 8GB using eight 1GB
DIMMs at 7uS -- compared to the 60uS ones in the Ultra-2
and Ultra-60.

3) Different disks. The internal disks in the Sun Blade [12]000
are FC-AL (copper Fibre Channel), not the SCA which the Ultra-2
and Ultra-60 use. (of course, you can use them in external
Unipacks or MultiPacks -- and the MultiPacks can even accept the
drives with the existing carriers (SPUDs) from the Ultra-2 or
Ultra-60. The Sun Blade [12]000 have a 68-pin SCSI bus connector
on the back, a separate internal SCSI bus which is used only for
the internal DVD-ROM, and optionally an internal tape drive.

4) The Sun Blade [12]000 use a SEEPROM (Serial EEPROM) instead
of a NVRAM -- and have a coin cell powering the clock chip
which is in a clip mount on the system board.


[ ... ]

But I don't
think I've ever heard of an Ultra 60 with 400 MHz processors.


My Sun FEH (Field Engineer's Handbook) says that there were 400
MHz CPUs for the Ultra-60. (501-5446 and 501-5500), while the ones for
the Ultra-2 were 501-5445 (one lower than the first of the Ultra-60
ones). The Ultra-2 ones had 2MB Cache, and the Ultra-60 ones had 4MB
Cache.

The 300 MHz CPUs (in both systems) had problems co-existing with
one version of the Creator-3D framebuffers.


They all
seem to be 360 or 450 MHz. I'm pretty sure that the hard disks can be
interchanged, though.


Yes, no, and maybe. :-) It depends on the direction. All use
the SCA 80-pin interface. The Ultra-2 has clearance only for 1" high
drives, while the drive bay in the Ultra-60 can handle 1.6" drives with
no problems.

In my case, that would be no problem. I only have 1" high drives.

Right -- you have the "easy" direction. :-) And I've never used
a 1.6" high drive in either of my Utlra-60s.

[ ... ]

I am not sure whether to pull the NVRAM chip from this new machine and
plug it into my existing machine, or whether to take my disks and SBus
cards from the existing machine and put them into the new machine. The
former is much less work, but the latter seems a safer bet. Any thoughts?


First -- just try bringing the system up as it is shipped. It
appears to have some version of Solaris pre-loaded, though it is not
clear which version. I have my doubts about a fill load of Solaris 10
with only two 9GB drives. :-) But this will tell you whether the
computer *as shipped* works, before you change anything. If it does not
have a framebuffer, you'll want a null modem cable between the new
machine's TTYA and one of the two TTY ports on your old machine, just so
you can see what it says during boot -- including total memory
installed. If your old machine won't work well enough -- you can use a
PC or a stand-alone terminal for seeing what it does.

I think that because of the case damage, I want to move the parts into
my old case. Is the any risk involved in just swapping the NVRAM chips?

Nope! Other than the possibility of turning the chip 180
degrees before plugging it in. Take careful note of which way around it
goes. I don't remember whether the Ultra-2 came with a carrier for the
chip which keyed it and protected the pins from being bent. I do know
that the Ultra-60 had that.

Fortunately the new machine keeps time when powered off.

Good. Have you written down the HOSTID and the MAC address as I
suggested? Remember -- these systems are getting old, and you may lose
the information from the replacement one soon. The longer it has been
powered up the longer the cell in the NVRAM will last.

I hope that you don't have any licensed software installed, as
that is keyed to the hostid (and possibly the MAC address) in the NVRAM,
and IIRC you were having problems with your current NVRAM.

I don't have any licenced software.

All that I have is an earlier version of the Sun compiler, which
is licensed to a SPARCstation 5. Solaris 10 has available for free
download the Studio 12 compiler suite, and the NetBeans IDE.

[ ... ]

It is a pity that the vendor in the auction did not feel it worth
while to put up a bigger image -- and one of the back as well.

I rather regret buying from this guy, but was just trying to save money.
At least the machine is still good for parts.

Yes.

What does RTB stand for in

"The unit comes with 30 days RTB warranty."? I hope
that it is saying that you can return it if it does not work. (Though
at that prince -- it is worth it for parts. :-)

I believe it stands for "return to base". That is, the buyer has to pay
the cost of returning it. So a way of making the warranty less
worthwhile for the customer and cheaper for the vendor.

O.K. Most eBay (and other) vendor have similar rules. And
since the cost of shipping dwarfs the cost of the machine, you might as
well hold onto it for parts.

[ ... ]

I don't think I've
tried the later grey/cream keyboard. But I tried a blue one and hated it.


I've never had a blue one to try. Is that the Type-7?

Not sure. It was current in late 2003 or early 2004, if that helps.

O.K. I was long retired from working in a computer center, so I
have not seen the newer keyboards. No clue when my current keyboard was
made.

[ ... ]

Sounds like an interesting lens. However, I get the impression that many
purchases of the fastest lenses were influenced to some degree by their
poser value. I don't imagine that too many people regularly used those
lenses wide open :-).


Well ... if I had the camera body to fit it, I would have used
it. I tended to do a lot of low-light shots without flash to avoid
calling attention to myself.

The D70 (digital Nikon) has the advantage that it will start at
200 ISO (ASA), and work its way up to 1600 ISO if needed to keep the
shutter speed reasonable. And while the image is a bit noisier at 1600
ISO, it is not as bad as the grain in a color slide or negative film
pushed to 1600 ASA. :-) Most of the time, I don't need faster than the
f:3.5 on the zoom lenses which I use -- though I have the 50mm f:1.4
autofocus, and a 180mm f2.8 which has been coverted to add a chip so it
will handle auto-exposure properly, even though it does not have
autofocus.

I rarely use my fastest lenses for hand-held low light photography. What
I do use them for is getting a nice blurred background, though. My
recollection is that a somewhat patterned background can still show at
about f/3.5 to f/4.

O.K. I've noticed that the lenses with the larger number if
iris diaphragm leaves are considered better for that sort of work, as
the out of focus bits have less perceptible shape (which they are now
calling "better bokeh" -- a Japanese term, I think. Of course, wide
open gives you just as good with any number of leaves, because it becomes
fully round by that point.

Many thanks for the help.

You're welcome.
Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On Nov 29, 10:03*pm, "DoN. Nichols" wrote:

Hi Don,

Sorry I've been slow to reply. My Ultra 2 has now died completely -
that is, it won't boot. The power light and fans come on, but nothing
appears on the screen, even after an hour or so. I'm not sure if this
can be the result of a dead NVRAM battery, or whether it must be a
system board fault. Before it died, there were some SCSI parity errors
(I don't remember them exactly, except that they referred to target 0,
my root disk) showing on the screen just after the memory test. But
the machine booted and worked a few times with the SCSI errors.

I'm not sure whether to just swap the NVRAM chips initally, or whether
to attempt a system board swap. But the old machine I have is an Ultra
2 Creator and the new one an Ultra 2 Enterprise (the seller didn't say
this in the advert) and I'm not certain that the two system boards are
identical. Do you know for sure?

Perhaps so, but even with a single threaded process the edge is not
great. And I think that is the only way you can make an Ultra 5 or 10
look faster than an Ultra 2. In many applications, the extra RAM and
faster disks of the Ultra 2 will more than make up for it. You can have
two 400 MHz processors, too.

* * * * That is why I mentioned "single-threaded". :-)

I'm not sure how many of the pieces of software which I use are able
to make good use of the dual processors. I use Nautilus and the GIMP
for viewing and processing images, QCad for drawing, Apache and MySQL
for building websites, Firefox for browsing the web, and a variety of
command line software. Of these, I find image processing and web
browsing the slowest.

snip

It hasn't arrived yet, so there are still ways in which the deal could
turn bad, but I'm hopeful that this will be an economical solution.

Well sadly the deal found a way to turn bad on me. The seller didn't
pack it well enough, so it now has a crack in the front. One of the
disks won't come out of its bay either, so I suspect there's a little
distortion in the chassis.

* * * * Hmm ... likely so.

Just looking at the chassis, it seems that the front left top corner
is bent back slightly. But I can't see how this affects the disk bays,
or how to fix the distortion.

I guess it is partly my fault for being cheap. I should have gone back
to a vendor I've used in the past who ships machines with six inches of
packaging, but he was asking more than twice the price. I wish I had
gone to him. I wouldn't have regretted it. I even hinted that the
machine was fairly fragile in my e-mail to the seller, and thought that
his high delivery charge would pay for some decent packaging, but it
seems he didn't have the common sense to pack it well. As someone once
said to me, the irony of common sense is that it isn't that common.

* * * * Agreed.

On the plus side, the machine works and has a genuine 2048 MB RAM, so it
will satisfy my needs. I'm just a little upset as the damage was avoidable.

* * * * O.K.

* * * * if it were not for the frame distortion, you could simply swap
covers from the old machine to the new one. *As it is, you now need to
transfer RAM (at least part of it), the NVRAM, and probably not much
else to the old machine.

* * * *The lack of a framebuffer means that you will have to swap in
one from your current system.

There is a framebuffer in the machine, just not a good one. It's an LSI
SBus framebuffer. But I have a spare Creator 3D, so it doesn't matter.

* * * * O.K. *And aside from that -- are you going to be using the
machine as anything other than a parts donor?

No, although if the machine wasn't damaged it would have made the job
a lot easier. I could have just moved the disks and processors. I
guess I'm a perfectionist, but the fact that the damage was completely
unnecessary irritates me. And now the seller isn't responding to me e-
mails.

Also, an Ultra 2 with two 73 GB disks just showed up on eBay. I might
need those disks if the SCSI disks indicated a bad disk.

* * * * And which version of Solaris is installed in it?

Solaris 8.

snip

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *I tried Solaris
10, but hated the version of GNOME which was included, and finding the
version I liked was not straightforward.

* * * * Was the source for the older GNUME not in the Solaris 9
"Software Companion" CD-ROM? *That could be transferred to the
Solaris-10 system and compiled to replace the newer GNOME.

Perhaps. But I'm not sure how easy it would be to compile, and at the
time I needed a system to use fairly quickly. Sometime I might try. If
I was going to do that, I'd also like to find a way of adding "Next
Image" and "Previous Image" buttons to the Nautilus image viewer.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *I know that many people despise
all versions of GNOME,

* * * * I've never usd it -- other than once booting into it for a
trial. *I opted to stay with CDE for as long as I can. *And it is still
present in Solaris 10 at least.

* * * * * * * * * * * *but I like version 2.0.2.. To me it is the right
compromise between efficiency and ease of use. The version shipped with
Solaris 10 had many features I'd never use, font anti-aliasing (why
anyone thinks this is better than bitmap fonts I don't know, it just
looks blurry) and a very unstable version of Nautilus. It just looked
more trouble than it was worth.

* * * * :-)

One of the good things about the Ultra 2 I've bought on eBay is that it
has 2 GB of RAM. Not that I'm convinced that this will speed the machine
up a lot, but it's something I've yet to acquire.

* * * *If you do memory intensive things -- like image processing, the
more RAM the better.

I do lots of image processing with scans from film. Usually big scans. I
notice that when I put a CD of scans in the machine, it loads them all
into RAM. It must do because after Nautilus has created thumbnails, I
can copy a full CD to my hard disk in a few seconds.

* * * * O.K. *Plenty of benefit from the added RAM then.

As for moving the Ultra 2 processors into an Ultra 60, I have been
variously told that:

* You can.
* You can't.
* Sun says you can't, but actually it works.

* * * *I believe that the third one is correct, based on past postings
in comp.sys.sun.hardare.

Right. So I could keep the processors and disks,

* * * * You could -- but if the Ultra-60 comes with the dual 450 MHz
ones, why bother? *and -- you could use 1.6" high drives for greater
capacity if you needed in the Ultra-60.

* * * * (Note that there is also a less common Ultra-30 which
* * * * is identical to the Ultra-60 except that it has a slot for only
* * * * one CPU module.)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *but not the RAM? At
least, I don't think the RAM is compatible. One day I may get an Ultra 60...

* * * * The RAM is the same 501-???? numbers with the exception of
501-2479 (16 MB per DIMM -- the smallest) which is only listed for the
Ultra-2. *I don't know whether it would work in the Ultra-60, but you
don't have any of those anyway. *Your full 2GB of RAM would fit and work
fine in the Ultra-60. *All of this compatibility is why I have been
suggesting the Ultra-60 to you. *Moving to a Sun Blade 1000 or Sun Blade
2000 would mean:

Thanks. That's useful to know. I have certainly heard contradictory
advice regarding the memory. But I don't have any of the 16 MB
modules.

1 * * * Different CPU modules -- not interchangability (but why would
* * * * you want to use 400 MHz CPUs in a machine which comes with up
* * * * to 1200 MHz CPUs? :-)

2) * * *Different DIMM modules -- maximum is 8GB using eight 1GB
* * * * DIMMs at 7uS -- compared to the 60uS ones in the Ultra-2
* * * * and Ultra-60.

3) * * *Different disks. *The internal disks in the Sun Blade [12]000
* * * * are FC-AL (copper Fibre Channel), not the SCA which the Ultra-2
* * * * and Ultra-60 use. *(of course, you can use them in external
* * * * Unipacks or MultiPacks -- and the MultiPacks can even accept the
* * * * drives with the existing carriers (SPUDs) from the Ultra-2 or
* * * * Ultra-60. The Sun Blade [12]000 have a 68-pin SCSI bus connector
* * * * on the back, a separate internal SCSI bus which is used only for
* * * * the internal DVD-ROM, and optionally an internal tape drive.

4) * * *The Sun Blade [12]000 use a SEEPROM (Serial EEPROM) instead
* * * * of a NVRAM -- and have a coin cell powering the clock chip
* * * * which is in a clip mount on the system board.

I don't know why, but Ultra 60s seem very expensive here in England.
The price is still around £130, which was what they were selling for
almost 3 years ago.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *But I don't
think I've ever heard of an Ultra 60 with 400 MHz processors.

* * * *My Sun FEH (Field Engineer's Handbook) says that there were 400
MHz CPUs for the Ultra-60. (501-5446 and 501-5500), while the ones for
the Ultra-2 were 501-5445 (one lower than the first of the Ultra-60
ones). *The Ultra-2 ones had 2MB Cache, and the Ultra-60 ones had 4MB
Cache.

* * * *The 300 MHz CPUs (in both systems) had problems co-existing with
one version of the Creator-3D framebuffers.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *They all
seem to be 360 or 450 MHz. I'm pretty sure that the hard disks can be
interchanged, though.

* * * *Yes, no, and maybe. :-) It depends on the direction. *All use
the SCA 80-pin interface. *The Ultra-2 has clearance only for 1" high
drives, while the drive bay in the Ultra-60 can handle 1.6" drives with
no problems.

In my case, that would be no problem. I only have 1" high drives.

* * * * Right -- you have the "easy" direction. :-) And I've never used
a 1.6" high drive in either of my Utlra-60s.

* * * * [ ... ]

I am not sure whether to pull the NVRAM chip from this new machine and
plug it into my existing machine, or whether to take my disks and SBus
cards from the existing machine and put them into the new machine. The
former is much less work, but the latter seems a safer bet. Any thoughts?

* * * *First -- just try bringing the system up as it is shipped. *It
appears to have some version of Solaris pre-loaded, though it is not
clear which version. *I have my doubts about a fill load of Solaris 10
with only two 9GB drives. :-) But this will tell you whether the
computer *as shipped* works, before you change anything. *If it does not
have a framebuffer, you'll want a null modem cable between the new
machine's TTYA and one of the two TTY ports on your old machine, just so
you can see what it says during boot -- including total memory
installed. *If your old machine won't work well enough -- you can use a
PC or a stand-alone terminal for seeing what it does.

I think that because of the case damage, I want to move the parts into
my old case. Is the any risk involved in just swapping the NVRAM chips?

* * * * Nope! *Other than the possibility of turning the chip 180
degrees before plugging it in. *Take careful note of which way around it
goes. *I don't remember whether the Ultra-2 came with a carrier for the
chip which keyed it and protected the pins from being bent. *I do know
that the Ultra-60 had that.

Good. Do you think that the NVRAM could cause the machine to die
completely, or do I likely have an additional fault?

Fortunately the new machine keeps time when powered off.

* * * * Good. *Have you written down the HOSTID and the MAC address as I
suggested? *Remember -- these systems are getting old, and you may lose
the information from the replacement one soon. *The longer it has been
powered up the longer the cell in the NVRAM will last.

I'll do that. You can extract them using the "eeprom" command, can't
you?

* * * *I hope that you don't have any licensed software installed, as
that is keyed to the hostid (and possibly the MAC address) in the NVRAM,
and IIRC you were having problems with your current NVRAM.

I don't have any licenced software.

* * * * All that I have is an earlier version of the Sun compiler, which
is licensed to a SPARCstation 5. *Solaris 10 has available for free
download the Studio 12 compiler suite, and the NetBeans IDE.

* * * * [ ... ]

* * * *It is a pity that the vendor in the auction did not feel it worth
while to put up a bigger image -- and one of the back as well.

I rather regret buying from this guy, but was just trying to save money..
At least the machine is still good for parts.

* * * * Yes.

* * * *What does RTB stand for in

* * * * * * * *"The unit comes with 30 days RTB warranty."? *I hope
that it is saying that you can return it if it does not work. *(Though
at that prince -- it is worth it for parts. :-)

I believe it stands for "return to base". That is, the buyer has to pay
the cost of returning it. So a way of making the warranty less
worthwhile for the customer and cheaper for the vendor.

* * * * O.K. *Most eBay (and other) vendor have similar rules. *And
since the cost of shipping dwarfs the cost of the machine, you might as
well hold onto it for parts.

Indeed. I might also be tempted to bid on the one with the two 73 GB
disks if it goes for a similar price.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *I don't think I've
tried the later grey/cream keyboard. But I tried a blue one and hated it.

* * * *I've never had a blue one to try. *Is that the Type-7?

Not sure. It was current in late 2003 or early 2004, if that helps.

* * * * O.K. *I was long retired from working in a computer center, so I
have not seen the newer keyboards. *No clue when my current keyboard was
made.

* * * * [ ... ]

Sounds like an interesting lens. However, I get the impression that many
purchases of the fastest lenses were influenced to some degree by their
poser value. I don't imagine that too many people regularly used those
lenses wide open :-).

* * * *Well ... if I had the camera body to fit it, I would have used
it. *I tended to do a lot of low-light shots without flash to avoid
calling attention to myself.

* * * *The D70 (digital Nikon) has the advantage that it will start at
200 ISO (ASA), and work its way up to 1600 ISO if needed to keep the
shutter speed reasonable. *And while the image is a bit noisier at 1600
ISO, it is not as bad as the grain in a color slide or negative film
pushed to 1600 ASA. :-) Most of the time, I don't need faster than the
f:3.5 on the zoom lenses which I use -- though I have the 50mm f:1.4
autofocus, and a 180mm f2.8 which has been coverted to add a chip so it
will handle auto-exposure properly, even though it does not have
autofocus.

I rarely use my fastest lenses for hand-held low light photography. What
I do use them for is getting a nice blurred background, though. My
recollection is that a somewhat patterned background can still show at
about f/3.5 to f/4.

* * * * O.K. *I've noticed that the lenses with the larger number if
iris diaphragm leaves are considered better for that sort of work, as
the out of focus bits have less perceptible shape (which they are now
calling "better bokeh" -- a Japanese term, I think. *Of course, wide
open gives you just as good with any number of leaves, because it becomes
fully round by that point.

Some people also like the eighteen-pointed stars that nine-bladed
diaphragms produce around bright light sources. They can look nice,
but I've never really objected to the six-pointed stars that my third-
party Nikon F-mount lenses produce. It's only an issue if the star is
a prominent feature in the picture. There are some nice stars to be
seen he
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/85mm-f14.htm

Also, some of the earlier non-AI Nikkor lenses which had a seven-
bladed (as opposed to nine-bladed) diaphragm also had a greater range
of apertures. The 35 mm f/1.4 had a minimum aperture of f/22 before it
became AI, and subsequently had a minimum aperture of f/16. I think
this was because the old system allowed aperture coupling over a
greater range of stops.

Many thanks,

Chris