The way it is used. Sent from my iPad
On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:07 PM, DSinc <[email protected]> wrote: > Anthony, > Fine. Agree. What set of technologies portend renaming Internet to Cloud? > Best, > Duncan > > > On 03/31/2011 20:30, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: >> The tech behind the "cloud". Saying it's a marketing term is besides the >> point. And its not just a marketing term, either, as it refers to a set of >> technologies that accomplishes a certain thing. It not just the internet, >> either. The term was in use well before people started trying to push it as >> they are now. Why the big deal over this simple term? It's not as if any of >> us get to decide what terms get used. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Mar 31, 2011, at 8:20 PM, DSinc<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Anthony, >>> What "tech?" CLOUD is a marketing name. The INTERNET is already a >>> reality. OK. Don't like the term "Internet". Fine. Let's rename it "Cloud." >>> Fine. >>> Best, >>> Duncan >>> >>> >>> On 03/31/2011 20:10, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: >>>> Why is there even a question of credibility? We all understand what is >>>> being referred to....a name hardly seems like a big deal. >>>> >>>> But yes, if the people who conceive of the tech don't have problems with >>>> that term, why should anyone else? >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPad >>>> >>>> On Mar 31, 2011, at 7:59 PM, DSinc<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Anthony, >>>>> Fine. So just because other "technical" people use the term, it gains >>>>> credibility? >>>>> "Cloud" is a concept at best. Yes, it is available to those willing to be >>>>> research >>>>> test subjects. No harm, no foul. >>>>> I quit. "Cloud" is a server farm to me. >>>>> Best, >>>>> Duncan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 03/31/2011 19:51, Anthony Q. Martin 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>
