Frankly, the hardware no longer matters.  Virtualization of hardware
to make for easier backup and migration of services is king in the
server market, and it will reign for a very, very long time.

More and more the software *is* being brought separate from the
hardware, and that is not a bad thing.


Christopher Fisk

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Anthony Q. Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> This point is that technical people, though who actually design and test this 
> stuff, use the term. Further, the term is in wide use already.....just look 
> around. Who cares if it is hardware or not.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Mar 31, 2011, at 7:46 PM, DSinc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Anthony,
>> Just because "research papers" use the new terminology "cloud storage" does
>> not, to me, make "Cloud Storage" a real, main-stream term.
>> When the end of "research" outputs a "product" I may use this new term.
>> For now, we are all arguing about interesting planetary server farms.
>>
>> Sorry, I cook wieners at Bryan's camp fire this time. Ultimately your 
>> "Cloud" theory
>> remains hardware based.  Unless I have missed something, software can
>> never perform any promised benefit without agreed upon hardware, connection
>> to the Internet, and, appropriate security protocols.
>> Should you lean Software, fine.
>> I lean Hardware.
>> Best,
>> Duncan
>>
>>
>> On 03/31/2011 19:21, Bryan Seitz wrote:
>>> Ok you win, cloud cloud cloud cloud cloud yay.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 05:04:46PM -0400, Anthony Q. Martin wrote:
>>>> Bryan,
>>>>
>>>> I'm surprised at you.  You're attempting to bully people into using YOUR
>>>> preferred terminology. But saying that use of terminology is not in
>>>> practice by those who are technical is total nonsense.  Just look at all
>>>> these research papers that use the term "cloud storage".
>>>>
>>>> http://xplorebcpaz.ieee.org/search/freesearchresult.jsp?newsearch=true&queryText=cloud+storage&x=0&y=0
>>>>
>>>> On 3/31/2011 4:31 PM, Bryan Seitz wrote:
>>>>> I did not mean it as an attack, I was just saying this is a technical 
>>>>> list and we all believe
>>>>> we are technical, so no reason to perpatuate bad nomenclature.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 04:00:44PM -0400, Brian Weeden wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks for the personal attack. It really lends credibility to your
>>>>>> argument.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> Brian
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Bryan Seitz<[email protected]>   wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    Good point but but on a technical list (And I assume you think you 
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>> technical),
>>>>>>> I would expect the buzzwords to be less frequent.  Even if your data is 
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>> a server or
>>>>>>> a bunch of servers it could just as easily be called remote/online 
>>>>>>> backup.
>>>>>>>   The term Cloud
>>>>>>> is purely marketing bullshit at this poing.  Products that have been 
>>>>>>> around
>>>>>>> for ages started
>>>>>>> calling themselves cloud even though nothing had changed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ps. Actually Amazon is not scattered that much, usually local to a 
>>>>>>> single
>>>>>>> datacenter and lucky
>>>>>>> if you have 3 copies, I worked there :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 12:59:52PM -0400, Brian Weeden wrote:
>>>>>>>> The reason to use "cloud": is to convey that it is a service that isn't
>>>>>>> tied
>>>>>>>> to a specific machine or set of machines.  Even if you use "online 
>>>>>>>> server
>>>>>>>> storage" that still infers that a specific computer or cluster of
>>>>>>> computers
>>>>>>>> somewhere has the data.  And if that computer dies, the data is gone.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The whole point with a cloud-based system is to separate the service
>>>>>>>> (processing power, data storage, whatever) from the hardware.  Gmail 
>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>> cloud-based service, and as a user you have no clue where the data is
>>>>>>>> physically stored, where the processing is done, or how it gets to you
>>>>>>>   And
>>>>>>>> in the case of a true cloud (like Google, Amazon, Rackspace, etc) the
>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>> is likely scattered everywhere, across multiple
>>>>>>> backbones/grids/continents.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bryan G. Seitz
>>>>>>>
>

Reply via email to