Jim,

> Sean, our list neo-con,

Hey! Do I go around calling you a Republican?

I may not be as crescent liberal red as you, I'm at least a pleasant
shade of pink.

There's no need for personal attacks! ;-]]]

> will argue that classic is important for Linux clusters. Where is the
> truth? Hard to say because the little bugger won't hold still.

Actually, my argument is:

- The Linux clusters exist today and aren't going away.

- There is very interesting technology in the High Performance
Connectivity area (InfinityBand...) available for Linux (and to a lesser
extent Win32) which allows for a common mapped memory space/area to be
shared between lower cost servers via interconnects which have EXTREMELY
high speed performance and low latency. The adoption of this technology
is growing and is being used to replace large server/mainframes.

- These technologies/platforms (especially HPC, IMHO) are the only way
that for computing solutions to scale in a price effective manner.

- Both require the classic engine/architecture -- (superserver will
never work in that environment - you agree, right?)

So to "sacrifice" classic would be short-sighted.


Sean