Slashdot Mirror


In The Works: Windows For Supercomputers

Robert Accettura writes "According to ZDNet, Microsoft may be feeling threatened by Linux gaining ground in the High Performance Computing (HPC) arena. As a result, they have formed a HPC group to bring windows to these systems. It makes a mention of how clustered computing may be a target. I guess the only thing better than crashing 1 computer at a time is crashing an entire room full at once."

14 of 705 comments (clear)

  1. Obligatory clippy comment by foidulus · · Score: 5, Funny

    "It looks like you are building a cluster, would you like me to tell you how Microsoft can bring it to it's knees?"

  2. hijack ware by wpiman · · Score: 5, Funny

    Great- when the cluster gets hijacked by spyware and the like- it can send out 3 millions spam emails a hour as opposed to the 5000 a Dell does now.

  3. Windows HPC by LittleBigLui · · Score: 5, Funny

    Because every Node needs a Windowing System in Ring 0.

    --
    Free as in mason.
  4. Proof by WordODD · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This action from Microsoft is proof positive that they are taking notice of the recent accomplishments of Linux and are trying to counter them with strides of their own in areas that are not their specialty. If nothing else then this is positive for everyone because not only will Linux continue to improve and develop on its own but now both MS and Linux will develop to compete with one another making the overall user computer using experience better for everyone involved. I know everything MS does is looked down upon by the /. majority but this really should be seen as "a good thing".

    --
    Please do not let scientific accuracy interfere with the intended humourous/interesting/insightful value of this comment
  5. Re:Windows on HPC? by beacher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One thing alone will kill this idea... Licensing costs per proc. Linux really shines when you want to keep the TCO down due to the fact that you can get away with doing it and have zero licensing costs. (Note the get away with - I know that most HPC/Grids are installed and supported and there is support costs but that's another arguement.....

    Imagine if Google had to pay Microsoft a recurring license for their server farm and be forced to keep in lockstep with Microsoft's Licensing costs. Think there'd be a higher push for advertising and more intrusive ads? I do.

  6. Re:Windows on HPC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Insightful?? Narrow minded and uninformed more like it! This is slash dot, news for nerds not lets poke fun at windows for everything they do even if it is useful.

    Now for the insight - Windows XP embedded has a mode to run headless (that is without a monitor or screen - the thing above the keyboard that looks like a TV and where the pictures change or for you "windows" haters the black screen with the green writing on it!)
    Also look at the Windows Storage Server no support for a graphic display on the box it runs on.

    Windows may not be your cup of tea but lets look at the good points and bad points when things like this are posted and use facts if we want to make fun.

    Bye Bye...

    P.S. sorry to jump on you Mr Trot but you were the first poster to make a dumb statement that got moded insightful but I'm sure there are more deserving victims of my rant. Guess I had a s#$% day!

  7. WIndows for clusters by miquels · · Score: 5, Funny

    .. codename "domino" ?

    --
    Living is a horizontal fall
  8. nah, just a PR move. by twitter · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This is a PR move. Clustering is just another thing that Windows can't do. All the Linux clusters popping up everywhere, especially at universities, demonstrate this to PHB and "influential" types. It tends to tarnish the wizz-bang image M$'s has carefully built among the clueless. Microsoft knows that PHBs will never run a cluster, a Hotmail or anything other than Word. By making one or two announcements, they can convince the clueless that M$ is all they will ever need.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:nah, just a PR move. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      What do you mean, Windows doesn't cluster? Of course it clusters! In fact, Microsoft go to great lengths to tell you how to cluster your Microsoft Windows Server to achieve the best performance. There's the:

      • Primary Domain Controller
      • Secondary Domain Controller
      • A backup Secondary Domain Controller (In case the first one fails)
      • The Exchange Server
      • The second Exchange Server (Because the first can't handle the load
      • The backup Exchange Server (In case one of the two primary Exchange Servers fails)
      • The IIS Server..
      • The fallover IIS Server..
      • The fallover fallover IIS Server
      • The MS SQL Server
      • The MS SQL Server backup
      • Two or more file servers
      • The Backup server, running Arcserve or similiar (Because even an MCSE can tell you NT Backup is utter turd)
      • The Active Directory Server
      • The backup Active Directory Server

      • See? All those computers in multiple clusters. Microsoft are always ahead of the game!
  9. Re:Windows on HPC? by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, they have done this with XP Embedded. We have tried this in a project for a windows-controlled device, and you *can* build a rather small Windows XP that has your program as "shell" instead of the usual Explorer. Maybe not quite as small as Linux in text mode, but it will do.
    The claims about Internet Exploder being inextricably connected to the OS were pure FUD for the antitrust suit.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  10. Re:I guess Bill thinks it's time... by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I guess Bill thinks it's time to slow the worlds fastest computers to a crawl. Apparently they aren't crashing enough, too.

    Well, unless Bill's going to introduce a version of Windows that doesn't have a Windows interface, WTF is the point? How many Beowulf nodes have you seen even plugged into a KVM? Windows is a stupid choice for a headless compute node just as Linux is a stupid choice for a home desktop.

  11. Windows Clusters available now..... by stiggle · · Score: 5, Informative
    Windows doesn't cluster? So what about those that have ranked in the Top 500 list then that run Windows?

    In the November 2003 list....
    At 68 - a Windows based system at Cornell from Dell with 640 processors (it originally started out at 320 on the list with 252 processors).
    At 128 - a Windows based system in Korea with 400 processors.

    So Windows doesn't cluster?

  12. Re:Crashing by ViolentGreen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is this. Some people, like yourself, have no problems with Windows, and it works great. Some people, like my girlfriend, have Windows installations that crash all the time. So yes, Windows can be perfectly stable, if you're lucky. (I should also point out that shutting the machine down at night shouldn't count; decent computers have sleep modes and never have to be rebooted just to make them stop using electricity.)

    With Linux or OS X or whatever, you don't have this kind of inconsistency. Basically everybody who uses them, ignoring people who run experimental kernels or unsupported drivers, never has them crash, even when the computers are up for months at a time. You don't have to be lucky or do anything special. Yes, Windows is better, but it still has a long way to go. When my girlfriend's PC stops crashing a couple of times a week (running XP) then I'll reconsider.



    I think it has more to do with the quality of the hardware than windows itself. On my old compaq computer, windows crashed all the time. On the machine that I built, windows is very stable. The difference is that I know what hardware is in the case and I trusted the hardware before I put it in.

    Both XFree86 and KDE were unstable on my old compaq machine as well. I had no problems with the kernal though.

    OS X is built to run on Apple's hardware so they don't have to worry as much about 3rd party hardware. Most all Linux users that I know build their own machines and know what hardware is supported by linux and what is not.

    I may be off here but that is my take on it.

    --
    Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
  13. Windows on a Supercomputer/Mainframe by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 5, Funny

    I love this whole idea of Windows on a supercomputer! Just think of how fast a spam drone it would make!

    Windows only technical asset is a (relatively) good GUI.

    And, as we all know, *ALL* mainframes, supercomputers and servers absolutely must have GUIs!

    After all,

    • GUIs are less resource-intensive than a CLI (but why would you care, having invested millions to get a couple of teraflops, about squeezing every last little drop of power out of it?)
    • GUIs save you time and effort! Rather than a simple shell, Perl, $whatever script to do things, have an operator point-and-click for that human touch!
    • GUIs, by virtue of being based on less code and with less features than a CLI, are inherently more secure. Microsoft, as we know, is the field's foremost expert in security and reliability.

    Memo at Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory:

    "Please be advised that Deep Blue will be rebooted this afternoon at 5:PM in order to complete the installation of Service Pack 11. All jobs currently running and queued will be lost, even those which have already accumulated several years of processor time. We expect Deep Blue to resume normal operation sometime in early August. Thank you for your cooperation, LANL Informatics Department"

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.