ivelegacy wrote:josehill wrote:I think SGI might have intended you to have a SGI workstation, more of a personalized environment. Like Apple
Actually, it was japes who said that, not me.
ivelegacy wrote:frankly it sounds like a business reason, like SGI wanted to force IRIX users to use an INDY or an O2 as Xterm, even if those products are *workstations* therefore they costed *more* than an Xterm
I don't remember a lot of demand at the time for such a thing. If you were buying SGI systems back then, you generally were buying them either specifically for their graphics capabilities (with expensive graphics cards being major differentiators from other systems) or for their server bandwidth/scalability. With the cost of the necessary graphics cards, you might as well just get a real workstation, diskless or otherwise. Also keep in mind that most of the world was using unswitched 10 Mbps ethernet LANs for nearly all of SGI's peak years, so high end, high resolution interactive graphics of the kind that people were using IRIX systems for could quickly bring a network to a crawl if there were more than a couple of users. Also, if your business case was to use an SGI workstation to admin an SGI server, SGI often would offer a very steep discount on workstations when you bought one of their servers.
Having said that, who knows? SGI never had a reputation for modesty or "entry level" products until after IRIX was EOL'd.