Eek, my old pages stirring the mud.
Is it the vanilla 6.5 info page you're all referring to? ie. this one?
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/6.5inst.html
True enough, there are many aspects it doesn't mention, the GUI stuff, user accounts, etc., but then a lot of this is covered in my Unix Admin Course.
I did create a different document that was included with custom CDR sets, namely this (plus an equivalent for 6.5.22, just change the URL to see the equivalent file):
http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/sgidepot/6.5.30instreadme.txt
Since it uses product selections files, included with my Gifts CD, it means there are *no* conflicts to worry about, and it covers a lot more than the above old page does.
What I could do is add the product selections files to my Depot Resources page for anyone to use, adapt the file into a more general guide.
Btw, the install topic aside, it's interesting what Weblacky is saying about the apparent perceived need to cater for "newcomers", it shows how the nature of the SGI hobbyist landscape is changing, but I suspect some may see some aspects of how people think things should adjust as a sort of dumbing-down of expectations. I'm not sure it's wise to alter too much the nature of things to pander to a "controlled environment" generation who, if that's genuinely what they're used to and find contrary environments uncomfortable, won't exactly take so well to the inherant nature of older computers anyway. One could make the argument that the basic nature of how older computuers were used, what one was expected to know or at least learn if need be, just is what it is. One can adjust to some degree of course, but the hand holding can go too far. Better perhaps to say, put the ipad down, if someone wants to get into these old computers then surely it's logical to delve into the mindset that surrounded them at the time in an authentic manner, if that is such is the goal. Otherwise the experience is a sham, an illusion, like a West World resort.
I often say in emails that a mistake many hobbyists make is dismissing the command line shell, because they're too used to GUI stuff. Pandering to a 'modern audience' in the way described would just make that worse. It doesn't have to be an either/or, but getting to know what these systems were really like at the time and how they were used in the way they were surely has merit, because that's a fundamental part of what they were (I've dealt with a great many ex-company machines, usage via the shell was very common). Otherwise we end up creating a fake notion of what SGIs were (or anything else), because it gets layered on top with modern simplified modes of convenience. Yes some pro uses of SGIs were all-GUI, but others were not; some presented only their dedicated interface and nothing else (the user never saw the underlying IRIX at all), like Discreet for example, others required the use of IRIX. I talked to company folk who didn't even know they were using SGIs.
I don't think the next generation is that dumb. Not only do I think they are perfectly capable of learning "the old ways", a great many might actually find it both a refreshing change and very educational, because that is surely part of the whole thing. Afterall, these days there does appear to be a pushback against the scale and depth of the tech explosion going on, attitudes are shifting. Let's not underestimate Gen Alpha's capacity or desire to learn; they may actually prefer the authentic experience, rather than the sanitised version. Beware of misplaced altruism.
The early 90s was a huge crossover point in the nature of many technologies, especially storage. The shift from tapes and floppies to other things, for example. If we disuade newcomers too much from delving into the nuance of how old systems work, how can we ever expect them to gain any passion for the even older or complex stuff like 4D Series, Onyx, Challenge, Crimson, PI, etc.? It would be a shame if the SGI landscape shifted just to the "easy" systems like O2 or Indy on the back of thinking one ought to reduce the complexity from a belief that unfamiliarity with old ways precludes an ability or desire to learn them.
I think it's better in general to preserve the nature of what SGIs were in their original form, encourage those who want to learn about them to do so in context, because otherwise much of the contemporary usage nuance of the 1990s is lost. I understand the appeal of modern addons like SD card adapters and all the rest of it (I've used ZuluSCSI), but going down that route as a norm means removing from the SGI legacy fundamental aspects of what they were and how they were used. Back in the day, people had to deal with DLT, DAT, QIC, etc., then later CDROM. It concerns me that trying to make everything too "easy" may dilute what ought to be the option for a more original experience. It's the same with modern emulators for consoles like the N64, or old home micros like the C64. I'm glad they exist for those who want to use them (with obvious advantages for modern coding), but I prefer to use original hardware because for me that was and still is fundamental to their appeal. I think SGIs are in a similar position, they are a manifestation of an era of tech that was in transition; how they were used at the time is a part of what they were, and thus of understanding their nature. Also essential for some of the machines which are just inherantly complicated.
I intend creating a guide on how to install IRIX from hard disk. Afterall, it's how I do it; largely automated, no CD swapping, very quick. But the experience is very different to installing from CDs, using a disk doesn't provide the same sense of what it was like to install IRIX back in the day. The guide will be useful for those who just want to get it done, but not what I would recommend for those who want to learn about SGIs more broadly and experience them in a more authentic context.
Hence I think we need to strike a balance, conveyed in some manner so that users understand that although there is some option X to get something done that is easy and quick, it isn't how it used to be done, it's not the authentic experience, so if they want the latter then there's also option Y; and often variations inbetween.
What people want from SGIs varies enormously, it's a vast spectrum. I've talked to hundreds down the years; some use SGIs in a way which would not appeal to others at all. Some care about the hw, others more the sw or coding. Some just like the aesthetics, others relish the challenge of restoration & repair, after which they sell the systems on or give them away (using them isn't for them, they just like fixing them up). Some like to install the OS from scratch, they want to understand how it works. Others just want to get a setup ready to use straight away with everything preconfigured (that's the crowd I mainly cater to). Some just want to run specific pro applications from long ago, others want to learn about the OS. These days some are retired professionals, they used SGIs back in the day and want to relive those times, they already know about them.
Thus, there's nothing wrong with presenting a guide that enables an easy method for installing the OS, but I don't think that should be the encouraged norm. However, that doesn't mean my old guide can't be improved; heck, my entire site needs a revamp, it's awash with dead links (plans underway).
Lastly, I have to point out the irony of modern modes of information provision (like YT) being of a form that cannot actually be viewed on an SGI.
This is why my site remains stubbornly plain old HTML, though next year there may be the first links to video content that's offsite, or downloads that need a PC or whatever to play them (I have many original VHS tapes to digitise).
Ian.
