Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oxide raises $200M Series C

oxide.computer

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 355 posts

Re: Oxide raises $200M Series C

#241

Post by wmf »

FireBeyond wrote: post #232
bubblethink wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All that is fine and well, and I love coreboot, openbmc, etc. as much as the next guy, but how is this a business with growth or scale? In particular, you are not going to sell to the large clouds as they do a similar thing in house, you are not going to sell to the large LLM labs as there isn't much of a story with NVIDIA here. All you are selling to is on-prem deployments for old(er) school workloads, which to me i…

I worked at Red Hat a few years ago... early 2020s. For our customers, something like 80% of our RHEL customers were still on-prem. Yes, cloud is huge, etc. But there's a very big iceberg of on-prem.

Because cloud customers don't pay for Linux and they use Ubuntu.

Re: Oxide raises $200M Series C

#242

Post by joshAg »

God, i am so glad to see these guys succeeding. The sun may have burned out, but the sky is still bright thanks to them. May they be so successful that i can eventually buy workstation versions of their minicomputers, sort of like how they made CoaL for triton.

Re: Oxide raises $200M Series C

#244

Post by AceJohnny2 »

lispisok wrote: post #219
pfraze wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you went through multiple rounds it likely means they were seriously considering you but ultimately they didn’t get to a yes. If it’s any comfort that means you did pretty well. The short stints on a resume is likely not the only reason you didn’t get to 100%, but unfortunately you should know that it’s seen as a pretty bad signal. The general expectation is 2 years minimum at a gig. If you have multiple short non…

Excessive amounts of interviews is more likely they were not enthusiastic about him but didnt have anybody else better and were stringing him along until they found somebody else.

I don't buy it. Seems like a waste of everyone's time. Even if you don't respect the candidate's time, it's still a waste of the employee's time, which is valuable to the company.

Re: Oxide raises $200M Series C

#245

Post by AceJohnny2 »

panick21_ wrote: post #129
robszumski wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no, but still being super impressive. CEO of a company rebuilding a CAD rendering engine because they put an LLM on top of it. So you describe the mechanical specs of the part you want and it models it. Takes all the tedium out of modeling stuff. Super cool and many applications.

They had to do CAD while working on Oxide and realized that it sucked. So she went off to solve that.

that's taking yak shaving to another level!

Re: Oxide raises $200M Series C

#246

Post by mindwok »

FuriouslyAdrift wrote: post #95
bri3d wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re players in a newish market segment called “hyperconverged,” basically “you buy a rack and it runs your workload, you don’t worry about individual systems/interconnect/networking etc because we handled it.” Oxide seem to be the best and most thorough in their space because they have chosen to own the stack from the firmware upwards. For someone who cares in that dimension they are a clear leader already on tha…

Microsoft and Nutanix have had a hyperconverged architecture for over a decade. Oxide is mostly an alternative to Nutanix or other soup-to-nuts private clouds. Oxide is a really nice platform. I keep trying to manipulate things at work to justify the buy in (I really want to play wiht their stuff), but they aren't going for it.

The first attempts at hyperconverged were very hardware focused and kinda meh. Nutanix is the best example - they pioneered hyperconverged hardware but the firmware/software was extremely average. Oxide are the first to say "it should just feel like cloud, except you own it" and building for that.

Re: Oxide raises $200M Series C

#248

Post by shimman »

oconnor663 wrote: post #111
shimman wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well one, don't look up to people you personally don't know. Parasocial relationships are not healthy. Look into your local community for people to be mentors or help you. That said I like Bryan Cantrill as an engineer and leader, but I would never put him on a pedestal.

On the other hand, it's normal to have heroes, and to need to have them.

This is a child mindset, people don't need heroes. They need leaders that care about them and want to better their communities; these leaders are found within your literal neighbors, friends, and family.

Re: Oxide raises $200M Series C

#249

Post by panick21_ »

bubblethink wrote: post #240
panick21_ wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you are not going to sell to the large LLM labs as there isn't much of a story with NVIDIA here Oxide just recently talked about that actually the LLM people do want to buy Oxide. Because turns out, doing everything around LLMs also requires compute, and quite a lot of it. And when you already have to deal with massive issues to run a complex advanced Nvidia stack you might not also want to worry about what firmwar…

>Dell has a market cap of 80 billion $, Supermicro has 20 billion $. Must really suck to be them I guess. For a startup, if the thesis is to take market share away from those two, it's actually not such a good story. You need a product that is 10x better than the competition, and I'm not convinced that the enhancements to firmware, reliability etc. amount to a 10x jump in business value prop. You aren't making silico…

The claim that you need a 10x better product to win any market share is simply incorrect, both logically and historically.

Maybe if people that bought Dell had a deep love for Dell products and were deeply integrated unable to move, but even then 10x is a waste exaggeration.

But if you have any serious academic literature that underlies this 10x claim I'm happy to take a look.

> You aren't making silicon. You are still ultimately a purveyor of other people's IP.

And neither does Dell and they are worth 80 billion $. And AMD doesn't make semiconductors, so they relay on other people IP. And TSMC doesn't make their lithographic machines or many other things, relaying on other people's IP. And all those materials relay on other people IP to be brought to market in the first place.

This is just a silly argument that for some reason puts CPU design companies as 'the real deal' and everybody else is somehow not good enough.

Historically good systems companies make just as good margin as most CPU design companies, specially those that don't have near monopolies.

> it's actually not such a good story

They are making inroads in a market that is 100s of billion $ large and people invested 300M$+ in them because they see costumer demand. If that's not good enough for you then I don't know what to tell you. I wish any of the starups I have worked at that kind of opportunity.

It seems to me you operate in a sense where anybody that doesn't go for a monopoly in a 5 trillion $ market is somehow not 'worthy' of being a startup. That just a very strange perspective on reality.

Re: Oxide raises $200M Series C

#250

Post by zozbot234 »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #237
jjice wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oxide and Friends is the only computing podcast I listen to anymore. It's a bunch of fun and they have insights I actually value. The original On The Metal podcast they did is incredible too. The interviews they had with computing legends are just fantastic.

Has the audio quality / recording method for Oxide and Friends gotten better? I have this horrible "completionist" tendency and I got stuck on a 2021 episode where the audio needed post-processing and I just never got around to it. I loved On the Metal and it was a bummer to fall behind on the new show.

There's absolutely no shame in "falling behind" on a podcast when even the audio itself is subpar, your time and attention is way more valuable than that. If the hosts have problems with that, they can provide sensible extra aids such as high-quality transcripts, to help viewers catch up on what they've missed without placing undue demands on their time.
Post reply on HN