Slashdot Mirror
Unholy Matrimony? Microsoft and Cray
fetusbear writes with a ZDNet story that says "'Microsoft and Cray are set to unveil on September 16 the Cray CX1, a compact supercomputer running Windows HPC Server 2008. The pair is expected to tout the new offering as "the most affordable supercomputer Cray has ever offered," with pricing starting at $25,000.' Although this would be the lowest cost hardware ever offered by Cray, it would also be the most expensive desktop ever offered by Microsoft."
...is not actually a "desktop". It's not even "a" computer. It's a cluster, and Cray could definately do better than this. Especially considering Unisys has built computers (no, not clusters) with a lot of processors a long time, many of them Windows Capable. So... Cray builds a cluster, Microsoft gets some free ad space for HPC Server. Hooray!
Why is Cray Supercomputing is a loosing strategy?
1. As standard computers increase they take over more and more of Super Computers jobs. Sure there may always be a need for something ahead of Mores Law but as more and more applications can be successfully run on standard computing hardware the need for super computers lessons. Back in Crays Hay Day Crays were used for all sorts of things businesses, education, etc... But now they are limited to more limited research.
2. Clouds and Clusters. Sure they may not be as good as a super computer for some jobs. However they can do the work that was previously limited to super computers only. Creating less demand.
3. Competition from more diverse companies. I hate to say it but IBM can afford to make the limited super computers for the reducing demand because they can make it up with mainframes and normal non-supercomputing big boxes.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
The man is spinning in his grave!
Just let Cray pass into history.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I don't know, but somehow I suspect that they will find a way of filling the whole thing with cludgy programs which nobody wants. It'll probably end up being about as fast as a P2.
When has MS ever seen extra capacity and said to themselves that those cycles belong to the customer?
If you're not in marketing, you need to be. Seriously.
Like the linux kernel developers are any better...every OS maker is greedy about increased CPU power. I first ran Linux in 1995 and it isn't that much faster now.
Well, I guess if you want to go back to pine for mail, it might be pretty quick.
This is my sig.
When has MS ever seen extra capacity and said to themselves that those cycles belong to the customer? Like the linux kernel developers are any better...every OS maker is greedy about increased CPU power. I first ran Linux in 1995 and it isn't that much faster now.
I just use WindowMaker as my desktop and turn off all the services I don't want. Its quite fast for me.
--- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
You can have up to 8 "blades". each blade is a dual socket Xeon board with it's own RAm and graphics. The blades are in effect dual CPU Xeon PCs. The blades are connected to an high performance Ethernet switch which ties them together in a cluster.
So if you call eight PCs connected to a network a "supper computer" then this is it.
Given that the Linux kernel is used in embedded systems with a tiny fraction of your desktop's RAM and CPU power, I'd call it pretty darned safe that the kernel isn't your problem. It's gotten somewhat bigger -- which is why 2.2 and 2.4 kernels are still in use in smaller environments -- but on any system with over 100MB of RAM, you're not going to notice.
Now, if you want to complain about application developers taking advantage of hardware resources (inclusive of the GNOME and KDE folks, browser developers, and the like), feel free.
As someone who does science HPC for a living, I am confused. Who actually wants Windows for HPC? What value does it provide that Linux or UNIX doesn't? I've never heard of a single use case where Linux or some UNIX wasn't better by miles.
Surprisingly enough, people choose Windows for reasons other than legacy. Maybe they have a lot of knowledgeable Windows developers, or the company has some stupid policy about which OSes you can use, or maybe they actually prefer to work with Windows.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
People still hate Microsoft because many of them remember the company eliminating other companies through illegal means and getting away with it.
Also, hatred for Microsoft in the United States is rising because they're making more and more of an effort to employ foreigners, falsely claiming that there is a shortage of CS and IT workers in the country.
What competing?
not trolling boys, so relax, its an OPINION.
For many of us coders, geeks and otherwise technically inclined here on Slashdot, this issue is one where for some, it is an emotional outlet, where few others exist. Others have issues pertaining to Sex, Families, LIFE, and other things to massage our emotional minds over.
To many of us, Microsoft represents something we love to hate, because we can. There is a disconnect between what works in technology, and what works in business. Many of us downplay the importance of Marketing, Leverage, Tie-in, Competition Analysis, and other stuff you don't learn in your CS program, but only in Business school.
We have a hard time seeing Microsoft as a business, responsible to its shareholders above all else, we embrace those orgs who see themselves as some kind of technical crusader, ready to right the wrongs in our industry, using truth, justice, and the American way.
It is the rare geek who can get beyond the technical arguments and embrace the quite logical reasons for why Microsoft has so much marketshare today. The concept of "Barriers to Entry" is rarely discussed when pushing an alternative to MS Office, Exchange Server, or other Microsoft tools.
Instead, we choose to blame the stupid CIO, who in a moment of insanity, decides to go with the Microsoft solution, like 90% of his peers, when he could be that brave, intrepid warrior for good, by going with Linux Servers, Open Office and more.
I mean, who actually uses those integrated Calendar/Scheduling thingies anyway, dammit? If I want to book a conference room 2 weeks in advance, I'll hang a post-it note on the damn door! Easy, and I dont have to deal with integrity testing that blasted Exchange database!
You see, there is nobility in suffering.
If it takes me a week to get my DVD-RW to burn disks under Linux, who cares, if I am a better person for the effort?
It is simply a case of the quest for perfection acting as an enemy of the "good enough".
This is a highly simplistic argument, tonque in cheek, and all that, but true.
And, as always, I got karma to burn bitches, so if you disagree, give it your best shot!
I wonder how many M$ licenses they'll sell vs. how many RHEL pre-installs they'll be doing?
The users shouldn't be anywhere near this system in a desktop environment! The skills needed for a desktop application DO NOT APPLY to HPC computing!
just an analog boy living in a digital age.
Yeah, without the "eye candy", what is the point of getting Vista when you can get XP, which is more secure(sadly), or linux, which is more secure and free? If you have to turn off features of the OS to get it to work, guess what? It isn't working well.
Heh, all I know is that these are gonna make one hell of an addition to some botnets, amiright?