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

The Cloud Computer

oxide.computer

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 994 posts

Re: The Cloud Computer

#211

Post by brucepink »

steve1977 wrote: post #92
nickik wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar in some ways different in others. But in terms of not being a PC architecture. Yes it is. But in many other ways its not at all like a Mainframe.

I’m not sure if “not PC architecture” is really an advantage for many customers.

If they care about security, it certainly is.

If you want more insight into all of the things that normally run on "PC architecture" - the 2.5 other kernels/operating systems running underneath the one you think you're running - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUTx61t443A

Re: The Cloud Computer

#212

Post by silverlake »

fefe23 wrote: post #11

This is actually a pretty big deal. They sell servers, but as a finished product. Not as a cobbled together mess of third party stuff where the vendor keeps shrugging if there is an integration problem. They integrated it. It comes with all the features they expect you to want if you wanted to build your own cloud. Also, they wrote the software. And it's all open source. So no "sorry but the third party vendor droppe…

How is this different from AWS Outpost?

Re: The Cloud Computer

#213

Post by JeremyNT »

yardie wrote: post #120
benpacker wrote: post #65

I know price will vary wildly based on how many you’re buying, but does anyone have the roughest ballpark for how much it would cost to buy one (1), or like two?

They mentioned it really quickly in their Oxide an Friends podcast but, IIRC, prices start at $500k. Some of the audience asked if they were going to do a smaller configuration like half or quarter rack. And they said they were looking into it but weren't sure the of the business case.

> They mentioned it really quickly in their Oxide an Friends podcast but, IIRC, prices start at $500k. Some of the audience asked if they were going to do a smaller configuration like half or quarter rack. And they said they were looking into it but weren't sure the of the business case.

That strikes me as being in the right ballpark, but it's going to be tough to swallow since that's the lowest level of granularity.

For most orgs you'd be left paying for a lot of excess capacity you couldn't immediately put to use as you migrate workloads in. I guess in ~4 years once you reach steady state and you're retiring / replacing these things it all works out, but if you're migrating from vmware or something else in a traditional blade/chassis world it's not like you can just wave a magic wand and move $500k worth of compute over to this thing at once.

If you're green fielding something, that's a lot of cash to sink in on compute you may not need for some time in the future. Never mind your DR site(s) also needing that much...

Re: The Cloud Computer

#214

Post by svnt »

caymanjim wrote: post #134
keepamovin wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, man! That's the way it should be done. It's not a company's business to decide how much your life should cost. It's its business to reward you for the value you provide, and that value is not tethered to your location, so neither should be your salary!

Except if everyone gets paid the same, you're not being rewarded for the value you provide. I don't think salary should be tied to location, but it should be tied to experience, ability, and effort.

Presumably their equity is not evenly split.

Re: The Cloud Computer

#215

Post by tivert »

That website is interesting. Maybe it's a Firefox bug, but when I load the page with NoScript on, the text is very weird, like this:

> TODay WE aRE aNNOUNCING tHe

It's actually much weirder than that, as some of the capitals in my quote are actually big lowercase letters, not capitals (i.e. the opposite of smallcaps).

Re: The Cloud Computer

#216

Post by dustingetz »

steve1977 wrote: post #41
throw0101a wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They sell servers, but as a finished product. They sell rack-as-compute.[0] Their minimum order is one rack: You plug in power and network, connect to the built-in management software (API), and start spinning up VMs. [0] With built-in networking and storage.

So just hyperconverged infrastructure with a cute name?

way better explanation than the website copy

"no cables no assembly just cloud" wtf is that

Re: The Cloud Computer

#217

Post by dewey »

KomoD wrote: post #207
dewey wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This site is usually helpful: https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?cou...

No, that should not be trusted, any random person can go mess with the numbers.

Just like Wikipedia and many other information sources. Don't trust one source blindly, do your research and you'll be fine. It gives a good enough general indication. A comparison like this will always depend on too many factors to make it applicable to everyone in any case.

Re: The Cloud Computer

#219

Post by alberth »

> "Today we are announcing the general availability of the WORLD'S FIRST commercial cloud computer"

(emphasis mine)

I'm having a hard time getting past the first sentence of this blog post.

Maybe I'm missing the obvious.

Re: The Cloud Computer

#220

Post by growse »

ollybee wrote: post #208
fefe23 wrote: post #11

This is actually a pretty big deal. They sell servers, but as a finished product. Not as a cobbled together mess of third party stuff where the vendor keeps shrugging if there is an integration problem. They integrated it. It comes with all the features they expect you to want if you wanted to build your own cloud. Also, they wrote the software. And it's all open source. So no "sorry but the third party vendor droppe…

Existing vendors will provide rack integration services and deliver a turn key solution like this. Also vendors of virtualization management software have partnerships with hardware suppliers and be happy to deliver fully integrated solutions if you're buying by the rack. The difference is in those cases you have flexibility in the design which seems to be missing here. Proxmox and a full rack of Supermicro gear woul…

Those of us who've bought large "turn-key" solutions from Dell etc. have often discovered that it's actually just a cobbled-together bunch of things which may or may not work well together on a good day, depending on what you're trying to do. Just because it's all got the word "Dell" written on it, doesn't mean that the components were all engineered by people who were working together to build a single working system.

When it breaks, good luck!

Post reply on HN