Inclined to agree--that comment cracked me up. :)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Bryan Seitz
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 10:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [H] $1000 / yr for 1TB of Cloud?
>
> haha I'd hang out w/ Duncan any time, he's got style and a sense of humor!
>
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:05:57PM -0400, DSinc wrote:
> > Anthony,
> > Thanks for your share. What age do you live in?
> > Best,
> > Duncan
> >
> >
> > On 03/31/2011 22:57, Anthony Q. Martin wrote:
> > > Are you serious? Move out of the dark ages or at least don't expect
the
> rest of the world to hand out there with you.
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > On Mar 31, 2011, at 10:38 PM, DSinc<[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> OK. Please tell me how the Internet use is differently than back in
> > >> 1970?
> > >> Really curious now..... :)
> > >> Duncan
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 03/31/2011 21:33, Anthony Q. Martin wrote:
> > >>> 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?n
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> ewsearch=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
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
> --
>
> Bryan G. Seitz
