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

771–780 of 994 posts

Re: The Cloud Computer

#771

Post by fuzzylightbulb »

SamuelAdams wrote: post #749
cryptonector wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bryan Cantrill is famously against vendor lock-in. He wrote a[n in]famous blog about the "FYO point" while at Sun. Oxide may be going for customers that also have the same aversion to vendor lock-in. One thing that Bryan understands is that you can "lock" the customer in with great products and services, as well as continuing development, while also making the customer feel secure in having a way out should you turn…

> How big is the market of sufficiently-vendor-lock-in-averse customers? Very. Just look at the USA defense spending budget. If you’ve ever worked on AWS-govcloud or secret, you know there’s a market here. This has huge use for military too. Imagine having a black site or off-grid location but still needing a rack of things. What if you could spin up an entire enterprise infrastructure by just loading up this rack? I…

> What if you could spin up an entire enterprise infrastructure by just loading up this rack?

This is already being done quite successfully with existing offerings. Flexpod, VxRack, Nutanix, there are a ton of options.

Re: The Cloud Computer

#772

Post by SoftTalker »

xp84 wrote: post #743
goldinfra wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coupling vs Decoupling is not some one-sided thing. It's a major trade-off. One of the most obvious examples of the problem with this approach is that they're shipping previous generation servers on Day 1. One can easily buy current generation AMD servers from a number of vendors. They will also likely charge a significant premium over decoupled vendors that are forced to compete head-to-head for a specific role (ser…

> will probably never be ideal for more savvy customers IDK about every use case, but slightly older generations of CPUs would affect me roughly zero. I'm sure there are things so compute-intensive that one would care very much, but a lot of people probably wouldn't bat an eye about that, and not because they're unsavvy. To the extent that these things are supported as a whole by the vendor rather than a bunch of fin…

Indeed, I'm still using a cluster of Haswell processors to run VMs for appropriate workloads and it's all fine.

Re: The Cloud Computer

#773

Post by steveklabnik »

dilyevsky wrote: post #764
steveklabnik wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do not currently have plans for a GPU-focused product, but it is on our radar.

Hey Steve, what is Oxide solution for multi-rack deployments? If i need to build spine-leaf do i have to byo spine gear or is it taken care of?

Details forthcoming :)

Re: The Cloud Computer

#775

Post by mixdup »

dboreham wrote: post #318
bigironcto wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for the response. The problem you described has been solved by the large vendors with Hyper-converged offerings for many years so it sounds like Oxide might be a bit late to the party. I do understand well the rational of running your own servers vs hyperscalers, as well as the repatriation trend but I see Oxide at best as a niche player.

This might boil down to "why does anyone need Stripe when there's Visa"?

Stripe and Visa are two different parts of the same ecosystem though. You can't really replicate Stripe with entirely Visa services

Re: The Cloud Computer

#778

Post by ahhfgsado6698 »

sangnoir wrote: post #623
dangoor wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They will also likely charge a significant premium over decoupled vendors It seems like they're trying to hit a middle ground between cloud vendors and fully decoupled server equipment companies. Using Oxide is likely cheaper over the life of the hardware than using a cloud vendor. A company who already has in-house expertise on running racks of systems may be less the target market here than people who want to do…

> A company who already has in-house expertise on running racks of systems may be less the target market here than people who want to do cloud computing but under their own control. True, but Oxide may find themselves competing against Dell or HP if they adopt Oxides software for their respective servers. Additionally, Oxide may find itself competing against consultants and vendors in specialized verticals (e.g. core…

HP and Dell would have to fundamentally change the way they design hardware and software to be that kind of threat, and if that ever happens I think I would be pretty okay with that outcome.

Re: The Cloud Computer

#779

Post by ahhfgsado6698 »

steveklabnik wrote: post #312
dustingetz wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

way better explanation than the website copy "no cables no assembly just cloud" wtf is that

Obviously different marketing copy speaks to different people. But that is referring to how, when you buy a rack from us, you don't need to put everything together and cable it all up: you pull it out of the box, plug in networking and power, boot the thing up, and you're good to go. Installation time is hours, not days or weeks, which is the norm.

[dead]

Re: The Cloud Computer

#780

Post by PTOB »

Kranar wrote: post #576
dmix wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know anything about buying servers, is that expensive?

Let's just say I hope I am interpreting something incorrectly, because if 500k is the minimum price and you match it to the minimum configuration found here: https://oxide.computer/product/specifications Then yeah, it's ridiculously expensive. That said compared to competitors it's in the right ballpark, but I have no idea how companies manage to spend so much money for this stuff. I am the founder of my own tech sta…

Tell me more!
Post reply on HN