Lights On But No One Home At Sun Grid
cygnusx writes "The Register reveals that Sun's pay-for-use grid computing services hasn't picked up a single customer yet." From the article: "The missing customers prove quite shocking when you consider that utility computing users must agree to be named in marketing programs as part of their contract with Sun - a fact learned by The Register and confirmed by a Sun spokeswoman. More than one year since it first started hyping the 'pay-for-use grid computing services' Sun is still weeks away from presenting a customer to the public. The program has proved much tougher to sell that Sun ever imagined."
You don't embark on a large project of ANY kind without at least securing a customer or two during the development process.
Unless of course you're doing something with free software like Bittorrent where you don't need to money and everything else is cost neglible.
If you "get" pointers add me as a friend (116)!
Well, it isn't like computers are so prohibitively expensive that everyone is rushing to use this anyway.
Obviously this news article is about as popular as SUN's new program
Does this mean that the only reason why someone would want such computing power is because they want to run projects they wouldn't want the public to know about?
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Can they compile my Computer Science homework for me?
I sent an email inquery to them right after it was announced, and no one ever contacted me. I even talked to someone at Sun (a different division), and still never heard from them....
Who would be willing to commit their resources to running applications on this system, which has no guarantee of existing after a couple of years? Selling computer platforms to customers, or providing a comprehensive ASP-style solution are more straightforward business models. And can Sun guarantee that data and applications will be secure on their grid system?
Nothing like that even exists. A bored PR person sent out a fake Onion-style news release and the rest is, as they say, history.
;-)
You were just one of the biters
If you "get" pointers add me as a friend (116)!
It really tickles my funny bone to see big companies make such big mistakes. I realise that this makes my a very cynical person but I can't help the way I feel. I like it even better when Hollywood makes giant flops. Remember that stupid Alexander the Great movie last year?
Seriously though, why would someone subscribe to this service? Its not like computers are overly expensive anymorew and there is a fairly broad base of expertise to draw upon nowadays for system admin services.
There was a lot of debate the last several times this was posted about Sun's $1/cpu-hour price, how TCO is a lot more than hardware cost, etc. Still, a google search reveals a bunch of other companies who lease out CPU farms (mainly intended for rendering), who charge less than $1/cpu-hour.
Personally I think the idea might work, but it might not in this incarnation. There seems to be a fair chance that Sun can claim to be ahead of its time again, which has in some ways been a while. Which is a good thing in itself, Sun has historically been a nice company to work with but has suffered from some stagnation for a number of years.
Many intelligent developers like Bram Cohen, the creator of Bittorrent, didn't have much while they were developing.
IIRC he spent a year or two living frugaly with relatives or friends because he knew he had a great idea and wanted it done as soon as possible.
Sure, he could have used some money, but he wasn't about to get a job and then have the company own his $8.7 million dollar idea (and that's just the current market value not including future potential revenue streams).
If you "get" pointers add me as a friend (116)!
An important question is whether this is a failure of marketing or a poor choice of target market. If the target market exists but is not using it, then you might be able to consider it a failure of marketing: There is demand and supply, but the demand is not aware of the supply. If the target market does not exist, then Sun has obviously chosen to go into an area which is not a worthwhile venture, at least at the present time.
Though, it's possible that the target market hasn't been formed yet and Sun is going for the "If you build it, they will come"; i.e. by creating the possibility they will generate demand for it in the future.
Join the Empire! http://www.empirereborn.net/
I bet that not that many people actually need extra CPU cycles that don't want those cycles on a more permanent basis. Perhaps the only people that need short-term access to computer power are fly-by-night spammers and DDoS extortionists.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Not exactly, but one of many reasons methinks. Another one is that people have a real problem running anything with their numbers on someone else's hardware period. If they are thinking that this is going to fly in the US where a great majority of adults drive their own cars to work even in cities with public transportation, own 3400 square foot McMansion instead of a 2000 square foot Victorian or in general prefer their own toys to play with they are smoking better stuff than me and I'm in Humboldt. Sun should of lent the platform to be sold as a software solution that would run on existing hardware like the office computers at night. I'm currently writing up a white paper for a grid computing solution at my new campus and it has nothing to do with purchasing any hardware or software and everything about using the computers we already have more effectively.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
In fact, however, Sun is still in beta with this CPU program and not set to launch a publicly available utility computing system for weeks...It seems hard to believe that Sun would pass on the opportunity to dangle such a user in front of the press if it existed given that we're 14 months away from the utility computing launch date...The company promises us such a day is coming sooner than later and that it will have plenty of customers to name in the near future. Still, given that it took a year to push the program to a beta, one wonders how long an actual living, breathing utility center will take.
I also must agree with anyone here who mentioned that you need to pick up customers during the development of the project and not just assume they'll come from no where. If you have at least one customer then they'll do far better publicity for you then thousands of dollars worth of marketing ever will. Sun might have a big name but that doesn't immediately get people jumping to their project. You don't dictate to people what they *should* do you make them think that using your product was *their* idea and that your just there to fulfill the customers requirements.
They should make it free to attract developers, then hype the service, grandfathering in people when it starts to take off. As it is, no one has apps, or even app ideas, ready. Sun's marketing people should know that, but failed. They have a second chance to do it right.
--
make install -not war
If you have tasks that can be done on compute farms, computer farms and clusters have gotten relatively easy to manage and deploy and are CHEAP.
Sun's charge of what, $1/CPU-hour is just way way way out of line compared with what you can build yourself (using dual core, dual processor athlons from Sun, for example), if you have any consistant demand.
Test your net with Netalyzr
"My Zombie network has 1000000000x the computing power of suns grid....
and you can use mine for some good CC numbers. any company CLEARING doing a cost benefit analysis realizes that its much cheaper to go with me."
-Founder of P0wnd Zombi3 N3twerkz
I totally agree. No effort has been made to figure out the security aspects of the solution. How do I know that my data is distinct from any other companies' data? Also, when it comes to big compute farms, doesn't that mean that I'm working on HUGE datasets? How do I get TB's of data to the gride farm and then get it *back*?
Seems like a "you build it and they will come" mentality. In the days of laptops with good compute facilities, I have to think this represents dinosaur thinking.
I've looked into grid computing a few times and ran a few clients as well. It seems that Jiva does the same exact thing, but much cheaper. Then again there is also Parabon and united devices, though they tend to charge even more than Sun.
Why on earth would any company ship their valuable data to a third party to process?
Completley agree with you, moreover the companies (as stated on the article) that could use this service are finance focused companies and maybe some phramacy companies.
This makes me think on the software laiability issues point, I am sure these companies would demand something very very far from the typical "EULA" or contract to use this service.
Darn I am sure any of the big stock exchange palyers would be really pissed of if someone was sniffing their data during the transit from Sun clusters to their clients.
I think a good way for Sun to make this service go up is that a company could rent them this CPU power and lease it to smaller users. Something on the lines of an Eceed UNIX client whose "virtual" servers run on these Sun clusters.
I remember I saw a talk on this system on the TADA0-IJCAI05 workshop. IIRC they are planning to give away CPU!
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Nah. This was for short-term high-CPU demand projects, like genome sequencing and protein folding.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
I'm on OpenBSD with KDE and when I click on the button to register for an account, nothing happens. There's the reason, bad programming. They don't have customers because people can't register! JERKS
I am sure Sun had massive computer power just laying around, they probably realized they could leverage it as a commodity while investing nothing but RandD they were going to do anyway. If MS and Google and all plan on huge ajax like projects, sun may very well have something in the future. :"who needs more than 64kb anyway!"
... that I (as an EA) don't really understand the proposition and what I can do with it. Sure I've read the blurb, I've even been to Menlo Park and had the presentation, but the question I want to answer is *what* of all my core apps I'm going to run on it. Do I get to go to Oracle grid on this stuff? Can I run all my core back office apps on it? What do I pay on top of the $1/cpu/hr? Bandwidth back to head office?
On top of all that, it's clear that I'm not going to abandon our existing investment in Sun hardware to take immediate advantage of this while that hardware still has a leasing life of 2-3 years. Sure I'm interested, it doesn't particularly benefit the company to have a stack of office space devoted to a computer room, and it's harder still when the business grows fast and we constantly need more gear. But Sun aren't in my face about this stuff, aren't giving me the numbers I need to take it to the CIO. When they do, then I'll think about it.
On the other hand, Sun are to be congratulated on their other initiatives in this kind of pricing model. To an enterprise with small numbers of staff but high revenue, their per FTE/yr software licensing on Java Enterprise System et al is a wonderful model which many other vendors will have to catch up with as we move to multi-core CPU's as standard. For us, the other J2EE vendors just can't compete on price (FOSS excluded of course).
Utility computing is coming, let's face it - but mainly it's a question of education of the masses, and time to get through hardware replacement cycles. Of course I'm a bit surprised that there's NO customers yet, but that still doesn't mean there won't be, ever.
Couldn't a company work something out with BOINC where they pay BOINC $.01 per CPU-hour, and $.01 per milestone to each participating member?
I bet people would sign up in droves if they could earn a little money for their free computer cycles. It could be paid quarterly or monthly using an online payment service like PayPal or through good old fashioned checks in the mail.
Just an idea, and for only $.02 per hour instead of $1.00 per hour.
Dave
People don't buy a computer to run a processor.
People want to run applications.
The thing I'm not seeing in Sun's model is anything about the applications. Are they off-the-shelf? Who installs them? Who maintains them? What OS's are available? What security is available? How can I make sure that no one else sees my data?
We've already been through with with the Application Service Providers (ASP's) and there are still a few out there making money by providing Internet access to their apps, running on their servers, storing and processing your data. Payroll is an easy app for that.
I think Sun is missing part of the equation.
Sun's "grid computing" operation seems to be an attempt to find a use for unsold Sun servers, or at least to avoid writing their value down to scrap prices.
f you went to a big hosting company and said you wanted a thousand unlimited-CPU-at-low-priority shared hosting accounts, valid only from 2300 to 0700, you could probably get a really good price. If "grid computing" were useful, somebody would be doing this. All those nearly idle CPUs could be doing something.
There's a successful grid computing company: Akamai. What they sell is distributed hosting and cacheing, which they call "Akamai On Demand Managed Services". When the web site for the World Cup or NASCAR or Britney is getting millions of hits per hour during some special event, thousands of Akamai servers switch to serving those pages to handle the transient load. That's a successful "grid" application, and it's been working for years.
Akamai does more than serve pages. You can run your business logic, in Java, on their servers. So they're already set up to run user code on their grid. If anybody is going to sell grid computing profitably, it's Akamai. They're all set up to do it. Yet they don't.
There were many "The engineers did it because it was cool and no one would buy it" comments. This might be the case, but Sun does have a marketing dept - and I'm sure that at least someone knew about it and did their homework.
That said, it is obvious someone in the marketing dept didn't get it right, but at some point it comes down to luck.
They are trying a new product in a new market space and it might fail - due to any number of reasons. The two that come to mind are: The customers don't know they need it yet (as parent said - ahead of their time), or that a competitor does it cheaper or better. This happens all the time to small startups, divisions within companies get axed, etc.
"More companies fail from a lack of customers, rather than a lack of product"
(I'm not saying Sun is going to fail, but this division might get axed.)
Welcome to the business world, it's vicious, yet rewarding if you do it right ('Google', 'Ipod' division).
I know why they don't get any science customers from my own experience. Basically, if you buy a cluster of your grant, you pay just for the hardware, everything else: electricity, cooling, network, comp support comes from the department's budget. These costs are not negligible.
If you tried to buy time from Sun, then everything goes from your budget... So, for an average scientist, who might be interested it is much cheaper to buy my own little cluster and piggyback on department's infrastructure...
This gives me the idea that all the talk about hosted apps/services/storage is way overblown. Google shows their hand M$ bites, nothing to show for it (yet); yet let's create some more buzz how you should keep your stuff in some far-away place with little control.
I believe that even though it sounds good, people are reluctant only because ownership physically changes hands. Which in the business world that is an important distinction. I know this may seem offtopic but this posting really does point in this direction.
Maybe with the history of easily being able to access your servers/workstations via a multitude of ways (term servs, RDC, VPN, Citrix... etc.), the market just isn't getting worked up about it. Which in M$'s case, you get that ability standard with as little as 1 online XP box (RDC), but for us with servers and domain controllers RDC is a godsend...
Me, as a business owner will gladly deal with licensing fees for a variety of uses instead of leasing space for a monthly/subscription price. Even though EULA-wise you technically don't own anything M$, but physical possesion alludes that it is a tangible asset.
God: When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
You give it away to somebody you trust, who locks down the cluster and gives you a private datalink, in exchange for CPU power you cannot afford yourself. And those big datacentres ought to have big private filestores for you to use too.
I dont know about pay-for-grid, but we host CERN-originated Large Hadron Collider simulations on our cluster, as do other sites all over Europe. There isnt the heed to build a single giant linux cluster, when you can use spare cycles from high performance across the entire continent.
-steve
SUN seems to have missed the mark. Even in research, budgets are an issue. If an organization has n dollars to spend in solving a problem, results are expected using n dollars. When you purchase equipment, you can re-compile /re-run the job without adding to your expenses. In order to properly budget a research task (in terms of CPU time) you must know the amount of time required to solve the problem. If you are responsible for the decision to use the SUN Grid and your problem takes longer to run than expected (even at $1/CPU/hour) you could get intro trouble.
For example:
A problem that runs 25% longer than expected
Budgeted: 10,000 CPUS x 16 hours = $160,000
Actual: 10,000 CPUS x 20 hours = $200,000
This 4-hour / $40,000 overrun could prove detrimental to one's career.
Anyone who is savvy enough to need GRID computing is savvy enough to build their own grid very cheaply. Sun's GRID would only be useful for times where one's own grid is overloaded for brief periods of time and you don't want to scale up (a confluence of factors that is very hard to predict and order from Sun ahead of time).
I'm surprised that there wasn't more of a business analysis of this ahead of time before they plunked down a ton of money to make it happen.
Find free books.
Depends on whether or not you value your data. Things like Seti@home and open blender can pull it off because their tasks are cpu-intensive, public data and nobody cares about timeliness of results. Also their algorithms are very cpu-intensive compared to the amout of data sent round.
If you have large quantities of private data, and your algorithm doesnt distribute as well as the massively-distributed examples, then you have less choice. You may want a large supercluster with infiniband backbone and a few terabytes of RAID-5 network storage.
I'm currently using our university student lab. But this is a mix of various machines, from 300MHz Sun Ultra 60 to 900 MHz SunFire machines, some of them limited in memory, and all used by students for their own nefarious purposes (e.g. pr0n and Quake). I'd love to be able to set 100 or so identical processors to the job. I could keep them fed for months. But at $1/CPU-hour, a day on 100 machines is $2400. I can buy 6 low-end Athlon machines for that money (and they will be just as good for the job). Yes, I do save in electricity and administration, but these costs are a) low for my application and b) come out of other budgets. For scientific work, SUN's prices are not acceptable. I would be tempted at a price of 1ct/CPU-hour. I would immediately buy into the thing for 0.1ct/CPU-hour with low-priority (i.e. I get to use only otherwise free processors).
Stephan
I think it's more like they saw IBM making money from it and decided they can't let IBM have the whole market. It's not like this was Sun's idea in the first place. IBM was the first big company to make an offer. It seems to be working for IBM, so Sun already knew the market was there. What they probably lack is a clear differentiating factor for their customers.
Developers: We can use your help.
Well, it's very expensive for people who're not in a hurry.
If you need a job done *now* and don't have time to build the cluster, I can see how it'd be attractive. Especially if it scaled really well, so you could spread it out over 2000 machines and finish in a day, instead of 100 machines for, say, two weeks.
I personally wonder if Sun might've got more business if they scaled the prices, so putting jobs on a few machines was way cheaper than putting them on a lot. Maybe then they'd have got people trying it out. Right now, it looks like to be worth it you've got to be in a serious hurry and/or unprepared, and willing to bet on a service you haven't used before. hmm.
Another barrier might be comms. You still have to get the data to the "grid" and get the results back. If we're talking terabytes - which isn't unlikely when talking about buying tens of thousands of CPU hours - then that's a big whack of data. Combine that with a customer who's in a hurry and doesn't already have their own HPC infrastructure...
I think they really screwed the pooch on the grid concept.
Because all the folks I know who need the capacity need it for more than a few cycles. For example, friend of mine kicked Sun to the curb and built a 125+ cluster of Dell 2850's running Linux. This cluster does oceanographic simulation btw. So it wouldn't have been a candidate for Grid because it would have been hideously expensive, more so than the 125 computer and the necessary electrical and cooling improvements.
I was looking at their grid some time ago for some compilations. I wanted to build crosscompilers for other architectures (GCC ARM). There were several options and compilations took too much time including GCC, UCLIBC and the kernel itself, so I wanted to compile every iteration of the arguments in question (a selected list of options from the 3 packages).
Therefore I needed lots of CPU power. I browsed around their site, no way to just BUY something and start using it. I emailed them. They answered with something like $1000 per hour per CPU.... dont remember but it was just not worth it..
I got myself a remote server at serverpronto.com, at $30 per month with an Athlon CPU. Left compile batch files on it for a couple o weeks and I got what I wanted (wasnt a blazing success, but I got the files on the cheap). Next I bought an Athlon64 mobo + cpu and used my scsi disk on it to get the compiles much faster.
Sun has abandoned the smallscale hacker community and they still have a LOT to learn. Nobody will pay $1000 for a service theyve never used before, and dont know how to use. Setup server farms with Ultrasparc4 cpus and Linux/Solaris running and offer them for a few bucks an hour, or a $100 per month including high intenet bandwidth. Heck even I can make a profit from THAT.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
It says "irrelevant". Honestly, I posted a comment awhile back asking this forum if there was any more irrelevant company in tech these days than Sun. This article just convinces me even more.
The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
Don't over-think this. The end game for this campaign was the fill-page adds in the major financial newspapers that allowed them to re-assert as the premier scientific/engineering/serious business app platform.
The imagery of this grid of servers available on-demand is desined to stick to the brain of C-level decision makers.
You're telling me that Multics^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hthe Sun Grid Utility is a failure? But systems like this have always been commercial successes in the past! Just ask Bell Labs or GE.
Seismic imaging and 3D computer graphics film rendering, are a couple of areas that might desire ten thousand nodes for a few months, and then dont want them for a while. I've heard of IBM offering a similar product. A major animation house rented a HP/Compaq super-cluster.
I've just finished the working-in-industry year of my degree, and the place I was working at was very enthusiastic about the Sun Grid; the problem was that they found it rather hard to port their (Linux and Solaris) software over to it. Don't ask me why, I wasn't in that team.
Isn't being pedantic about language one of the sympoms of Asperger's syndome?
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
EAA.
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
They never asked who the heck would want this. Then they could refine things like costs and opportunities.
This was an idea which was not required. The cheapest thing in the world is a CPU cycle. Unless you're doing things that demand far more that a Beowolf clauter can deliver, like SETI, and that aren't proprietary, like no commercial products I know of, you don't actually WANT this service.
What where they thinking?
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
I was considering building my own cluster, or possibly using Sun myself, but that company charges $1 per CPU per 24hr day; nice. And no power consumption worries either.
Someday we'll all be negroes
You got me :-)
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
85% / 90% of Office Resources is in Windows! How do you think I can format the HD from the raw BIOS with a VBA macro?
Maybe $1 per cpu hour is too expensive. Either they'll have to sell the time at a market price, or shut the system down and write it off as a loss.
Sun just wants about 5x what the market rate is for a CPU-year.
Not too surprising IMO. In order to keep latency low they may have to keep utilization low, which means they have to overcharge to make up for it. In general, renting something at small granularity is more expensive than renting at large granularity.
The multiplier is too high, unfortunately. I have an issue like this, but it's for manpower. There are times during a year when I could use 10 architectural drafters per engineer, cranking away furiously for 2-3 days. Problem is, those times happen maybe once a quarter. I can't afford to hire even a single drafter full time and make money. If you could have "drafting on demand" from a pool of 1000 compentent drafters for double my normal cost ($25-$30/hr vs $12-$15) I'd jump at it. At 3x the cost, I'm scraping up against breakeven (remember - I can do it myself, in house, it just takes longer). At 5x the rate ($60-$75/hr), I can't bill out the service for what I pay for it. I'd rather take on less and have my lead times a bit longer than lose money on my biggest jobs.
Though you've been moded redundant, the core of your logic is right on topic - there's a limit to "need it right now" premium. Sun appears to have found a spot above that mark.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I'm not surprised. Anyone here remember processtree.com? It was a for-pay distributed computing company that never got off the ground, probably because it couldn't find any customers.
First, you have to have an application that would benefit from Sun's "the grid". That rules out 99.9% of all applications right out of the gate. Then, you have to find one that isn't already running in some cobbled-together-yet-acceptable manner. That rules out 99% of the remaining 0.01%. You're left with two or three applications, tops.
Now think about the expense in actually preparing an application to run on this "grid":
- You have to re-build the app in a way that it can run on Sun's "the grid"
- You have to test it on "the grid" (this is probably the easiest part, and it still will cost at least US$100k in equipment, software and time)
- You have get the app bundled up in such a way that you can put it on Sun's "the grid"
- You have to get your data over there to Sun's "the grid" so that the app actually has something to crunch
- You have to get your lawyers to give you permission to put your data over there on Sun's "the grid"
- Your lawyers either just say "no" (probably!) or they suck up time from your best engineers to verify that it's possible to securely put your confidential data over there on Sun's "the grid"
- Your lawyers then say "no"
In the end, like most business decisions, we see companies going with the "known and trusted" instead of risking their assets on the "unknown and untrusted". Makes sense, doesn't it?
Peace.
Of course it is interesting to see who (in the real world) are those companies?. If we suppose they are some top-notch companies that use a lot of processing power (like stock market companies wanting to run their models) they may preffer (and they may already have) to run their own servers to protect their secrets.
I suspect that one of the promises Sun makes is "your data and programs will never, EVER be at risk of theft, and will only ever be even known about by our machines, and one or two highly-trusted and superbly compensated employees". At least that's what I would promise...
Freedom: "I won't!"
This makes me think on the software liability issues point, I am sure these companies would demand something very very far from the typical "EULA" or contract to use this service. With services like this you demand a Service Level Agreement (SLA) which spells out exactly the level and type of services required, penalties for non-performance, and any other requirements (security of data, etc.) and their related penalties. In no way, shape or form do you have something that resembles an EULA where the provider can wave their hands and say "we aren't responsible." I have no idea what Sun is providing for their SLA. It'd be interesting to give it a read. Something else to go looking for if they publish it at all.
"[I]t is a wise man who admits the limits of his knowledge or skill, and that pretending either causes harm." --Terry Go
Oh, come on mods, kick up the two posts above this as +1 "Teh Funnay"!
If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
Never underestimate the power of beer, young man.
Stick Men