[HN Gopher] A $36,000 Graphical Workstation from 1993 - SGI Indi...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A $36,000 Graphical Workstation from 1993 - SGI Indigo 2
        
       Author : doener
       Score  : 34 points
       Date   : 2024-08-15 14:19 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
        
       | hmsp wrote:
       | These things were so awesome back in the 90s. I got to use quite
       | a few of them and even owned a couple in the early 2000s as they
       | were being thrown away.
       | 
       | It always blew my mind that systems like SGI and SUN existed and
       | yet somehow windows was allegedly cutting edge.
        
         | throwaway48540 wrote:
         | Windows NT - the OS to run on comparable computers - was
         | cutting edge, and still is in many ways. Don't be fooled by the
         | similarly named products made for 100x less powerful computers.
        
           | IntelMiner wrote:
           | What computers that ran NT in the 90's were "100x more
           | powerful" than UNIX workstations, exactly?
        
           | anthk wrote:
           | NT and intel didn't catch up SGI/Mips and Dec/Alpha until the
           | Pentium III, and in the case of the Alpha, even the 800MHZ
           | one was subpar against the Alpha.
        
         | fred_is_fred wrote:
         | I'm not sure it was a much considered cutting edge rather it
         | was considered cost effective. 99.99% of office workers did not
         | need this kind of workstation, windows systems were cheaper and
         | became ubiquitous.
        
           | hmsp wrote:
           | Oh I agree.
           | 
           | I mainly meant "to the general public" this (windows 98) was
           | cutting edge.
           | 
           | Almost no one even at the time knew what SGI was. In the late
           | 90's and early 2000's even apples share was tiny.
           | 
           | It just blew my mind then how horrible the experience of
           | using windows was compared to Unix and that windows won.
           | 
           | I had a job in 2001 running a bunch of computers: 1/3
           | windows, 1/3 Unix and 1/3 Mac - os9 mostly. The Unix and Mac
           | just worked.
           | 
           | The windows computers broke so often I set them all up to use
           | SMB shares for user file storage. Since they were all the
           | exact same dell systems and all had the same software on them
           | anytime one broke I'd just boot a Linux CD and use "nc" and
           | "dd" to rewrite a functioning disk image to the system in
           | question and bring it right back up to usable. Then it was
           | just a matter of logging in the right SMB shares and the user
           | just thought I'd fixed their computer.
           | 
           | It was a fun time.
        
             | rbanffy wrote:
             | > Almost no one even at the time knew what SGI was. In the
             | late 90's and early 2000's even apples share was tiny.
             | 
             | It wasn't even very convenient to read e-mails. GUI e--mail
             | programs were not up to the Eudora level on those machines.
             | And heaven forbid you needing a spreadsheet.
        
               | anthk wrote:
               | By 1999/2001 I think you already had Star office.
        
         | pipeline_peak wrote:
         | Linux or Windows NT combined with gpu companies like Nvdia ate
         | into everything that made SGI successful.
         | 
         | As a geek, I miss exotic Unix hardware with their shapes,
         | colors, and RISC chips. As a nerd, who needs that when AMD64
         | and Nvdia get the job done.
        
           | hmsp wrote:
           | I once had a magical collection of chips from old Unix
           | workstations - dec alphas and vax, dig and sun. I was
           | responsible for cleaning out a large storage room of
           | computers from the 70s-90s and I pulled all the processors I
           | could because they were amazing objects to look at.
           | 
           | I remember throwing out handfuls of ram chips measured in the
           | KB and thinking how much each handful originally cost.
           | 
           | I was like 19 when I did this and everything got lost to time
           | in the end.
           | 
           | It sure was a fun time as a Unix geek playing with all this
           | old hardware. We had a dec box running netbsd that had an
           | absurd uptime - like 12 years or something. Labs of Sunrays
           | running off of 8 processor mainframes. SGI's around the
           | edges.
           | 
           | But even then I was slowly replacing this stuff with Linux.
           | There was just no competition and as much as I loved the
           | legacy Unix stuff it wasn't as nice or as easy to run as open
           | source alternatives.
           | 
           | I'm glad I got to play in that world though.
        
             | pipeline_peak wrote:
             | > I'm glad I got to play in that world though.
             | 
             | What made it so exciting? Was it just the novelty aspect of
             | having different flavors, architecture, and environments?
        
               | rbanffy wrote:
               | For me it was the diversity. Even though the machines
               | themselves were similar, some did some things a lot
               | better than the others. Some had ridiculously fast disk
               | IO (the Suns, usually), some had silky smooth mouse
               | movements (the SGIs), and so on. Also, there were the
               | different GUIs - I loved Sun's OpenWindows - and SGIs
               | could use better font smoothing (but only NeXT was doing
               | that back then).
        
       | jmclnx wrote:
       | I usually do not watch videos, but this one was very nice.
        
       | crest wrote:
       | Oh an old "Indy without the go."
        
         | sillywalk wrote:
         | The Indy was an Indigo without the go.
        
       | apercu wrote:
       | I bought one when I started an ISP, could have used intel with
       | Linux but Linux was very very new. After the ISP was acquired
       | (just the customers, not the hardware) I had the Indy in my
       | apartment for a bit, but someone really wanted it and I was able
       | to sell it for decent change.
       | 
       | Did anyone else notice that they made strange clicking sounds?
        
         | mst wrote:
         | My first ISP environment back in '00 was a mixture of FreeBSD
         | and BSDi, though we did eventually acquire a Mandrake box to
         | trial linux on.
        
           | apercu wrote:
           | This was '94/95, Linux was an option but _just_ barely....
        
         | jprd wrote:
         | Spinning drive noises?
        
           | apercu wrote:
           | I always assumed the click was the drive but never knew. The
           | rhythm reminded me of the old 70's Battlestar Galactica Cylon
           | eyes. It was a weird, slow click.
        
       | yardie wrote:
       | I got to use one of these when I worked at printer. It ran EFI
       | Fiery and was probably overkill for RIPing printing plates with a
       | laser etcher.
        
         | fidotron wrote:
         | There was at least one RIP company (name forgotten) that
         | repackaged SGI machines with their software as single purpose
         | devices. That was definitely a thing for a while.
         | 
         | For those unfamiliar a RIP took postscript input and spits out
         | very high resolution black/white images for each separate ink,
         | factoring in all the halftone generation etc.
        
       | dmbaggett wrote:
       | We used these to make Crash Bandicoot and we even had a mode
       | where you could run on the game on the SGI. It was ... sort of
       | ... playable.
        
         | rbanffy wrote:
         | It makes sense - SGIs and PlayStations were all MIPS back then.
        
       | julienchastang wrote:
       | Surprisingly entertaining video. It was on a workstation similar
       | to this one that I first used the Mosaic web browser circa 1993.
       | Strangely, the first web site I visited featured a picture of Al
       | Gore (not making this up) then US VP. I cannot find a reference
       | to that web site anywhere or what content it may have contained.
       | Does anyone else remember this?
        
         | neilv wrote:
         | It might've been the original whitehouse.gov, which was a
         | fairly early Web server (before they were called "sites").
         | 
         | This archive is from later (IIRC, HTML table layout wasn't yet
         | used in 1993): https://clintonwhitehouse5.archives.gov/
         | 
         | Reportedly, whitehouse.gov was implemented in Common Lisp.
         | (This was before the dotcom gold rush, so a lot of Web stuff
         | was done by fringe Internet/computer uber-nerds -- mostly "this
         | is interesting", and not usually "this pays money".)
        
           | lispm wrote:
           | > whitehouse.gov
           | 
           | Not all. The publications distribution feature was implement
           | in Common Lisp.
           | 
           | > so a lot of Web stuff was done by fringe Internet/computer
           | uber-nerds
           | 
           | That part was actually done by a team from MIT.
        
           | qingcharles wrote:
           | A lot of my early web projects were written in C. Everyone
           | else seemed to be using perl. Doing a lot of string stuff in
           | C was annoying.
        
             | rbanffy wrote:
             | In Perl it was less annoying, but I agree - C doesn't
             | really have strings in any convenient sense.
        
       | cyphax wrote:
       | I love these work stations. Many (15+) years ago I used an Indy
       | like a sort of dumb terminal, using X forwarding. It was very
       | cool to use an application like a modern Firefox on such an old
       | Unix installation even if it really ran remotely. It worked quite
       | well remoting from a modern Ubuntu computer. I still have the
       | Indy (and a small assortment of other old SGI machines, including
       | 2 Indigo 2s), reviving these machines is on my bucket/todo list.
       | This video sure makes me want to grab one (the Indigo mostly) and
       | get all nerdy. Would love to see more!
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | In probably 1999, I had a borrowed old Indigo 2 (probably with
       | IMPACT graphics) in my dorm room... used only as a generic
       | general-purpose Unix workstation, not for 3D.
       | 
       | I replaced it with a modest Linux box, which was much more
       | practical (Celeron 500MHz, 128MB RAM, basic Matrox G200 graphics,
       | non-fruit-colored case): https://www.neilvandyke.org/cheap-
       | pc-2000/
        
       | justanother wrote:
       | As a longhaired teenager, I rarely got the chance to physically
       | touch these things (although it did happen a couple times).
       | Mostly I remember telnetting into a machine, noticing that it was
       | Irix, and being able to login as "4Dgifts" without a password for
       | a root shell. The joy was short-lived though, because as soon as
       | you tried to build software (regardless of how "portable" the
       | package was), you ran into interesting problems, if the compilers
       | were even installed. I eventually got to spend several days with
       | a Webforce Indy and its fancy (what we would now call a) webcam,
       | where I took my first-ever selfie in 1995 and made my peace with
       | the dev environment. These lil things were definitely ahead of
       | their time, even if their price tags weren't.
        
       | mst wrote:
       | I used an Indigo2 with a pair of 21" Sony 13w3 monitors (one
       | rebadged as Sun, one as CGI) as my desktop for a couple years.
       | 
       | When I finally had reason to swap it out for a more normal
       | system, it went down to London to become a CPAN testers smoke
       | testing machine until the hardware finally gave out.
       | 
       | Fantastic piece of kit. I especially liked that when we had a few
       | weeks of power blips if I came home to see 'power brownout
       | detected' as a console log entry (it always survived them fine
       | itself) that was a useful indicator to go through all my x86 kit
       | and bring the casualties back up.
        
         | steeeeeve wrote:
         | I can't even imagine how awesome that would have been.
         | Honestly.
        
           | mst wrote:
           | That was in ... '04 ish? And, yes, it was indeed awesome.
           | 
           | As with all my desktops since time immemorial, its purpose
           | was to provide an X11 environment that I used to ssh to
           | everything else, so I never really stressed the machine
           | itself.
           | 
           | This isn't (I think, memory fuzzy at this remove) a
           | screenshot from that box, but it'll give you a feel for what
           | one of my monitors would be displaying -
           | https://trout.me.uk/sc2.jpg
           | 
           | Zero use of any of the shiny, just treating it as a solid old
           | school workstation - the closest I had to a complaint was
           | that it took me a little while to adjust to the level of fan
           | noise.
           | 
           | With a remote browser instance to deal with the billion tons
           | of JS I wouldn't at all mind going back to that setup today.
           | 
           | But it served valiantly in its subsequent life, so I feel I
           | treated it with the respect it deserved.
           | 
           | (also because nobody really cared about that sort of kit at
           | the time the Indigo2 and the monitors were cheap pickups off
           | ebay, I'm not sure I've ever had better "bang for the buck"
           | from building out a work setup)
        
         | emchammer wrote:
         | What graphics option did you have? Two 13W3 outputs?
        
       | AnimalMuppet wrote:
       | Those were such nice machines. Good graphics, good processors,
       | good memory, good OS. They were a joy to work on.
       | 
       | Did anyone else play BZFlag on them?
        
       | fidotron wrote:
       | The 90s SGI machines were great, for graphics, but it is
       | mystifying how many people used them as standard workstations
       | given things like Suns had better CPUs. Toy Story was designed on
       | SGIs and rendered on Suns for a reason after all.
       | 
       | The great oddity of SGIs was the multimedia peripherals worked
       | properly, and this is the bit of the experience the NT and Linux
       | replacements never quite managed.
        
       | YZF wrote:
       | I used to have that same ViewSonic monitor used in the video for
       | some time and I think I just recycled it. Mixed feelings seeing
       | someone actually wanting to use one ;)
       | 
       | SGI's workstations were super cool. I think I saw one or two in
       | action but never got to actually use one. Another cool graphics
       | workstation from that period was IBM's RS/6000, I remember seeing
       | a demo of Catia running on that and it blew my mind.
       | 
       | I'm curious how current day GPU architecture traces its heritage
       | to earlier 3d acceleration if at all. IIRC 3d hardware at the day
       | was about rendering shaded triangles + Z buffer.
        
       | anthk wrote:
       | BTW tons of Gopher users from SDF (gopher://sdf.org , use the
       | search option at Veronica) have screenshots and daily usage of
       | SGI machines with modern software ported into Irix.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-18 23:01 UTC)