Mythology about Unix workstations

March 10, 2010

Talking of Unix workstations, there's some mythology about them that seems to go around, or at least that may be going around and I feel like preemptively shooting down.

First, people who think that 1990s era Unix workstations were marvels of performance and features that have yet to be surpassed either have a very selective memory, were using very high end hardware from SGI, or never really used those workstations. I have used everything from Sun 3/50s onwards, and I can assure you that a modern PC that costs $500 smokes each and every one in terms of speed and features.

In fact, as I alluded to in passing in my original entry, old workstation hardware was actually rather terrible. It was not bad for the time (sometimes it was quite good), but it was not very good on an absolute scale and it was tolerable only because the software was equally limited so as not to exceed the hardware's capabilities. Let us not idolize the old days lest we be forced to live in them again, thanks.

The other piece of mythology is the idea that Unix workstation hardware was at least a marvel of niceness and good design compared to the hodgepodge and hacks of the current PC architecture. I am pretty sure that this was historically false; I certainly remember a whole stream of Usenix papers about what could basically be called 'the secret life of your hardware', where a number of kernel hackers wrote up bitter descriptions of exactly how bad various pieces of hardware were, such as Ethernet driver chipsets. Graphics were not exempt from this; for example, at the start of the 1990s, some DEC people wrote an entire paen about the advantages of an extremely simple framebuffer because its 2D performance beat the heck out of most of the then-current more complex graphics chipsets.

(Before you snort in disbelief at this, note that it was an 8-bit framebuffer. That was considered mainline or even advanced at the start of the 1990s, since at least you got 256 colours.)

I don't think that this should surprise anyone. People make design mistakes at the start of anything, because it takes time for them to figure what really works and what just looks good on paper, and the Unix workstation era happened in the early times of people making (commodity) chipsets for most of the hardware capabilities that we now take for granted.

(The less said about various workstation vendor predecessors to SCSI the better, especially in the server space. I still remember our early 1990s decision to pass over this new, low-performing 'SCSI' stuff in favour of an advanced, fast IPI disk interface on our new Sun 4 server. This being a university, that server stayed in production long enough for our laughter to become rather hollow.)


Comments on this page:

From 76.113.53.58 at 2010-03-11 03:45:21:

The biggest thing about workstations of the 80s was the RAM and address space, which allowed them to run demanding applications, which PCs simply were unable to support, no matter what. And frankly, m68k and RISCs were faster until P6-200 shipped. Graphics were better too. Sun shipped 1152x900 framebuffers when PCs had VGA. I worked on those. I think the righteous indignation about the workstation shit swept under the carpet makes you forget the basics that mattered back then.

BTW, Intel 82586 (with its "dead time") was the only available controller in its time, aside from things DEC made out of medium ICs. Lance etc. came later. So PCs definitely did not have any better networking. Surprisinly, Macs had crap network made from a multidrop serial, long past PCs growing Ethernet. Still, workstations were way ahead in that.

By cks at 2010-03-12 00:10:20:

I entirely agree that workstations were superior to PCs of the time up through at least the mid 1990s (and I should have been clear about it in the entry). I just object to the mythology that old workstations are (were) better than even today's PC hardware, or that their hardware designs were marvels that were free of unpleasant warts (unlike the much-derided PC architecture). Whether some people like it or not, the machines of the Unix workstation era have been surpassed since then.

(In retrospect my use of 'current PC architecture' in this entry was really unclear. I knew what I meant, but I can't expect other people to; I should have used 'today's PC architecture' or the like.)

Written on 10 March 2010.
« How not to design an API (in C): the enum ordering mistake
Why the pam_mail PAM module is not my friend »

Page tools: View Source, View Normal, Add Comment.
Search:
Login: Password:
Atom Syndication: Recent Comments.

Last modified: Wed Mar 10 02:56:38 2010
This dinky wiki is brought to you by the Insane Hackers Guild, Python sub-branch.