At 04:41 PM 1/18/2007, Robert G. Brown wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2007, Jim Lux wrote:
And likewise, WinXP on the desktop. A company with 20,000 WinXP
desktops cannot tolerate BSODs and mystery hangs on a significant
fraction of those desktops at any frequency. When your call center
operators are being timed to the second, the sysadmin folks know
INSTANTLY when there are problems.
But, just as in the server application, the configurations are
rigorously controlled and tested. It's certainly not the usual
home computer with umpty-five downloaded widgets, etc.
Even with strong controls and an instantly reinstallable system image,
WinXX boxes are corrupted once a month or so in our labs. Too many
things that can go wrong. Fortunately, they've dropped the
reinstallation time to almost nothing.
Linux remains around the 1% level in US desktop occupancy, and even in
the pacific rim where its numbers are the best it only makes it to 3% or
so (the rest are doubtless mostly bootleg WinXX). The largest monopoly
ever to exist in the history of the world laughs at these numbers. On
the broader server market Linux fares better, but it is still very much
David against Goliath where David may appear sometimes to be winning,
but Goliath has yet to be hit in the head with any kind of stone.
More like grains of sand being dribbled about the feet.
Well 1% of a person's height would TECHNICALLY be somewhere between 1
and 2 cm. And in the server arena, it would be quite a bit higher.
Say, small pebbles to just the kind of rocks one can turn an ankle
on...;-)
I should have used a different metaphor, though. Microsoft so far has
been to Linux like Fezzik was with Westley in The Princess Bride,
tolerating its occassional blows. "I just want you to feel you're doing
well. I have for people to die embarrassed..."
Basically, MS's cluster product is almost certainly designed to do two
things. One is provide them with a credible presence in the cluster
market not because it is particularly important to them as a profit
center but because hurting linux and the other unices strengthens their
position in the general server market in many ways. They do not want
<snip>
I dunno. I found print somewhere reflecting the overall HPC market
for 2007 looking like $11.4B growing at nearly 10% per year thru
2010, with departmental and workgroup clusters estimated at 6.6B.
Completely aside from putting a dent in the linux armour, I would
expect that someone within MS had a huge epiphany in terms of how
they might be able to help dice up that $6.6B. You can bet they've
been working with hundreds of significant ISV's and they'll be close
to their projected ROI, whether it's a better mousetrap or not.
I think it's also to support the turnkey software vendors who need
a platform with more compute crunch for their existing Windows
application. Think finite element models of one kind or
another. If your application costs $50K/seat, a kilobuck or two
for an OS isn't a big deal.
As I said, they might want to make money, sure, and although they MIGHT
do it at a loss if they thought it was important enough they certainly
would rather not. I think they'll make money, but probably not a lot.
It's almost like developing a new business, and there is plenty of
competition even though of course they'll exploit their advantages where
they help.
rgb
--
Robert G. Brown http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/
Duke University Dept. of Physics, Box 90305
Durham, N.C. 27708-0305
Phone: 1-919-660-2567 Fax: 919-660-2525 email:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
