91–100 of 113 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Texas has been a magnet for data centers for years.
Interesting. I wonder what the factors are that lead to that? Cheap energy? Absence of severe weather? Something else? NC is now becoming know as something of a magnet for data centers[1], and the "cheap energy" part is one of the reasons that's often cited here. [1]: http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2013/01/04/north...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 2000 , Telia got a single IBM G6 mainframe hosting 1500 virtual Linux images. You'll note that's a tiny, "ancient" model. IBM currently quotes ability to present "thousands" of virtual Linux images on a single current zSeries mainframe. These servers have virtualised storage IO, virtualised network interfaces etc. and management interfaces older than most of the developers on the hipper cloud platforms. So to clai…
There's a lot that you're misunderstanding here. A z mainframe can support a ton of VMs as long as the VMs are completely idle . A VMware cluster could do the same thing. The performance of z is so "good" that it will never be disclosed publicly. But that has nothing to do with the cloud, because the cloud is all about automation. Mainframes are about manual provisioning and management. IBM does have experience with…
Is that true? I know nothing about mainframes, so it's an honest question
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You say that as like turning a profit is a bad thing. Are only lottery exit aspires allowed to call themselves startups?
The term "startup" does have the connotation of aspiring to high levels of growth rather than steady, possibly mediocre profitability.
Knowing would make googling for the profit focused version of HN much easier.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The term "startup" does have the connotation of aspiring to high levels of growth rather than steady, possibly mediocre profitability.
Curious, what is the term for a new business that looks to establish steady long-term profitability instead of the grow and cashout model? Knowing would make googling for the profit focused version of HN much easier.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The term "startup" does have the connotation of aspiring to high levels of growth rather than steady, possibly mediocre profitability.
Curious, what is the term for a new business that looks to establish steady long-term profitability instead of the grow and cashout model? Knowing would make googling for the profit focused version of HN much easier.
Worth observing that for all the excitement about the recent crop of billion-dollar Silicon Valley startups, SoftLayer is based in Dallas, TX (and founded only in 2005). I suspect, and this will be easy enough to prove one way or the other after a few years so feel free to call me on it, that we'll see a disproportionate number of successful exits come from /outside/ the valley. My gut tells me that high-cost of livi…
There is one major problem to starting what are to become big tech companies outside of the Bay Area: labor supply. Very few places in the world can feed the labor needs of a fast growing tech company. Even the largest companies in the Bay Area have to go to New York, LA, and elsewhere to hire more people. What that means is that you are welcome to start a company wherever you like, but when it comes time to hire a l…
Isn't this THE problem everyone is complaining about in the Bay Area right now?
but when it comes time to hire a lot of people fast, you wouldn't want to be in any other place.
I can name so many other places in the world that I could hire way more developers elsewhere.
There's different types of technically capably labor supply. The one your talking about is most likely the people who are writing very complex algorithms, NLP, or the "hackers" who are writing rails apps over the weekend. The other 90% is writing Java, .NET, SAP (ABAP), etc for big co. These resources are not in short supply and can be found virtually anywhere in the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IBM can't build a cloud of their own or they wouldn't have needed to buy SoftLayer. Since they don't have this expertise, they pay a ton of money for a company that their perceive as knowing "the cloud". This is doubly ironic because its IBM that introduced the mainframe to the world, but that's another story. SoftLayer and everyone not named Google or Amazon can't drop their prices 40+ times every 5 years because th…
> Google and Amazon are playing the ultra-thin margin long game and the result is that they hope to destroy the competition with an aggressive pricing floor. Could you explain this a bit? I found Amazon and Google overpriced and slow compared to other hosting solutions.
The web hosting business has always been cut-throat, where price cutting and overselling are the norm. And since we started to have fast enough CPUs several years ago, the price has been dropping ever faster, as the CPUs continue to work after the initial costs have been recouped. For example, nowadays there are a lot of deals for dedicated servers with Xeon L5420, a quad core 2.5Ghz processor released in Q1 2008, before EC2 went public.
The sad part about EC2 is that it doesn't shy away from overselling while keeping the same high price. The micro instance with its meager CPU allocation would be the poster child of overselling. There are some naive crowds here who believe EC2 doesn't oversell. Well, just ask Netflix: http://blog.sciencelogic.com/netflix-steals-time-in-the-clou...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IBM can't build a cloud of their own or they wouldn't have needed to buy SoftLayer. Since they don't have this expertise, they pay a ton of money for a company that their perceive as knowing "the cloud". This is doubly ironic because its IBM that introduced the mainframe to the world, but that's another story. SoftLayer and everyone not named Google or Amazon can't drop their prices 40+ times every 5 years because th…
In 2000 , Telia got a single IBM G6 mainframe hosting 1500 virtual Linux images. You'll note that's a tiny, "ancient" model. IBM currently quotes ability to present "thousands" of virtual Linux images on a single current zSeries mainframe. These servers have virtualised storage IO, virtualised network interfaces etc. and management interfaces older than most of the developers on the hipper cloud platforms. So to clai…
The thing is that they don't want to cannabalise their own business. If they made zSystem mainframe linux instances accessible with a credit card (~2-5 seconds to boot, RAM-speed local networking, 5-9s hardware availability) they'd risk severely cutting into some of their most lucrative lines of business.
So they won't do that. Not right now, anyhow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a lot that you're misunderstanding here. A z mainframe can support a ton of VMs as long as the VMs are completely idle . A VMware cluster could do the same thing. The performance of z is so "good" that it will never be disclosed publicly. But that has nothing to do with the cloud, because the cloud is all about automation. Mainframes are about manual provisioning and management. IBM does have experience with…
> The performance of z is so "good" that it will never be disclosed publicly. Is that true? I know nothing about mainframes, so it's an honest question
IBM often writes "performance test" periods into their contracts -- you get x weeks per year to trial the higher levels of performance. This is a sop that realises that mainframes are busiest at financial reporting times, especially at the end of financial year.