--- a b <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I'd like to have their problem, because they have the $$$s to > solve it. > > They do not have that money. They have virtual money becuase of the > stock > value. It is speculative at best what would happen if they tried to > exchange > all that virtual money for cold, hard cash. > > >There is no site that takes more hits than google, IMO, and they > can > >sustain the worst days. They're doing something right. > > Yes, they are. They are taking the brute force approach, which I > like to > call "the American V8 approach": > > a big block V8 is extremely inefficient. It guzzles fuel. A > Japanese > turbodiesel engine will beat the living daylights out of it if it > had the > same volume. But a V8 has brute, raw horsepower, and plenty of > cylinders > which give it the near-turbodiesel's momentum, and that huge volume > that > gives it top speed. > > In the same analogy, Google more likely than not has a countless > army of > people to run those server farms, where in a well thought out > architecture, > up to 30 people would suffice.
To be all UNIXY: from "The Art of UNIX Programming" by Eric S. Raymond, (2004) page 13 (2nd paragraph) states: Ken Thompson, the man who designed and implemented the first UNIX, reinforced Pike's 4th rule with a gnomic maxim worthy of a Zen patriarch: When in doubt, use brute force. > >I don't know what they'll use in the future, but know that they > use Linux > >today and are able to keep their site going and their stock price > seems to > >reflect that Google is a growth player on Wall Street. > > Google's stock price is high because investors perceive it to be > such. Is > perception the reality? Perhaps if one keeps convincing oneself > long enough, > perception becomes the reality. At least for that person. The reason the stock is high is that the market perceives (and we're talking about frightfully bright people who sit in very comfortable Manhattan offices) that Google can come up with stuff that makes the entire world economy more productive and can make monetize the stuff. > The reality regarding Google is that they are completely > irrelevant. They > offer an abstract service that one cannot eat, drink, or create > clothing and > shelter from, especially not in a 3rd world country, and especially > not > directly. Only indirectly, provided certain social and financial > prerequisites are met. If a world-wide nuclear holocaust were to > take place > tomorrow, Google would be worthless, irrelevant, and insignificant. > I've > argued this before. Along with the Everything Else, including producers of foodstuff, cars, airplane, electricity, and cotton/wool farmers. Your point again? > At it's core, Google is nothing more than a fast and effective > search > engine. And that's nothing special in and of itself. And that, knowing the crap that is on the internet, is the most stunning fact of all: that their search engine actually works well. My hats off to them. Further, that Microsoft with it's billions can't get it right, but a bunch of hippies with linux in a basement can is even more stunning. (replace basement with multi-hundredmillion-dollar data centers, change hippies with geeks) Chris Mahan 818.943.1850 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.christophermahan.com/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
