Received: by 10.66.72.42 with SMTP id a10mr7719839pav.34.1352764488208; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:54:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.242.74 with SMTP id wo10mr5874563pbc.9.1352764488167; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:54:48 -0800 (PST)
Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!kt20no6825574pbb.1!news-out.google.com!s9ni5145pbb.0!nntp.google.com!kt20no6825568pbb.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.alpha
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:54:48 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20121112071113.0380e66a@Crunch>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=216.99.217.196; posting-account=BAsR5QoAAACeTuJW0ieTaa3yw7rR4RaF
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.99.217.196
References: <56214f6d-8b62-4e21-a4fa-49e62f41481d@googlegroups.com> <20121111093737.6a64132d@Crunch> <d505407e-eba9-41a7-b7dc-7fee6f04eee9@googlegroups.com> <20121112071113.0380e66a@Crunch>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <344e47af-bc69-434f-86ee-e006b50161a9@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: WTD:  UP1500 or UP2000+ motherboard
From: tony@tonyjones.com
Injection-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 23:54:48 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.alpha:13

On Sunday, November 11, 2012 10:11:17 PM UTC-8, Marc Schlensog wrote:
> Steven Hirsch replied to me personally, I hope he doesn't mind that I
> share his valuable information here too:
>
> "A significant number of the UP2000+ boards have chipsets that have
> succumbed to electro-migration in varying degrees.  I gave away my
> system last year to another collector.  It was progressively losing its
> ability to work with multiple memory modules installed and was down to
>=20
> 512MB when we parted ways.
> "Even if you can find a working UP2000, don't count on it for long-term=
=20
> reliability."
>
> This is consistent with my experience with a lot of CS20 (which
> basically are UP2000+ systems in a 1U enclosure) and various other=20
> reports. While the API systems are to varying degrees* pretty nice on=20
> paper, they aren't built to last. The CS20 had another flaw in form of=20
> an unreliable PSU.
...
> *) This most certainly doesn't include UP1000 and UP1100 :)

Is this saying that the UP1000/UP1100 isn't nice on paper or don't have the=
 same long-term reliability issues as the UP2000(+) ?

I'd heard several other reports of the UP2000(+) not being long term reliab=
le.  Thanks for confirming. Is the unobtanium UP1500 similarly afflicted?

If someone wanted an Alpha workstation which supports Linux,  what would be=
 the intersection of "fast" (for 2001 era), quiet (workstation), reliable a=
nd reasonably obtainable be?   ATX form factor isn't essential,  the UP1500=
 just sounded like a nice system due to EV68/AGP/DDR.