The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main as well.
Christopher Keller <cwkel...@gmx.net> writes: > Isn't one of the advantages of cloud computing the avoidance of over- > or underprovisioning? e.g. Above the clouds: A Berkeley View of Cloud > Computing: d1smfj0g31qzek.cloudfront.net/abovetheclouds.pdf > > "1. The illusion of infinite computing resources available on demand, > thereby eliminating the need for Cloud Computing users to plan far > ahead for provisioning. > 2. The elimination of an up-front commitment by Cloud users, thereby > allowing companies to start small and increase hardware resources only > when there is an increase in their needs. > 3. The ability to pay for use of computing resources on a short-term > basis as needed (e.g., processors by the hour and storage by the day) > and release them as needed, thereby rewarding conservation by letting > machines and storage go when they are no longer useful." somebody is provisioning ... could be considered like interstate highways ... shared resource rather than each person building their own highway ... but that doesn't mean there can't be traffic jams. not all that different that any community shared resource ... cellphone towers, internet, etc. there is direct analogy with online commercial time-sharing services in the 60s & 70s ... there were some number of them that started off with (virtual machine) cp67 in the 60s and then later vm370 in the 70s. misc. past posts mentioning (virtual machine based) online commercial time-sharing services http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#timeshare for another take ... this is decade old post of a two decade old comparison of a SNA configuration using 19.2 point-to-point links versus high-speed network backbone using T1 links (for a large corporation). http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#67 Not only was the T1 backbone configuration (communication products division didn't offer products with T1 capability) much cheaper and had higher availability, but avg & 95percentile response was significantly better. this sort of ran afoul of the communication products division of course communication products division also wasn't happy with clone controllers. as undergraduate in the 60s ... i had tried to get the 2702 to do something that it couldn't quite do. somewhat as a result, the univ. started a clone controller product ... initially using an Interdata/3 minicomputer. Reverse engineered the 360 channel interface, built a channel attachment board for the Interdata/3 and programmed the Interdata/3 to emulate the 2702 (with a few additional bells & whistles). An article blamed four of us for initiating the clone controllers. misc. past posts mentioning clone controller http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#360pcm -- 40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar70 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
