@cy @0xabad1dea windows machines by definition are not workstations.
@fedops @cy @0xabad1dea
Why not? My vintage Mac Pro is running Windows now and it has dual Xeon, ECC RAM, all that shit…
Well, maybe there is a different definition of workstation that I'm not aware of 🤔
@fedops
What exactly do you expect me to find there that would exclude Windows machines "by definition"?
The article states that the term is loosely-defined and this: "However, by the early 2000s, this difference largely disappeared, since workstations use highly commoditized hardware dominated by large PC vendors, such as Dell, Hewlett-Packard, and Fujitsu, selling x86-64 systems running Windows or Linux"
🤷
@m0xee I don't expect anything. I'm just saying that inflationary use of the term workstation is not useful. A unix workstation is a workstation. A windows PC is a PC. That's all.
@cy @0xabad1dea
@fedops
To me it still is that way, I consider ECC RAM mandatory and SMP-capable CPU os opposed to commodity one — no matter how many cores it has.
As for software, NT 3.51 came in Server and Workstation editions — and I don't remember anyone minding that naming even in the mid-nineties, they have revived it as separate Workstation edition of Windows 10.
The term UNIX workstation sure exists, but it was always denoted — just like you did, but never implied.
@fedops
BTW Mac Pro and PowerMac G5 are both undeniably workstations, but they run the same UNIX-like Mac OS X as every other mac did in their time, but it doesn't make every mac a workstation. Same way, calling HP's Z-series workstation running Windows a PC would just feel weird.
@cy @0xabad1dea