Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Sun Microsystems Businesses

Lights On But No One Home At Sun Grid 232

cygnusx writes "The Register reveals that Sun's pay-for-use grid computing services hasn't picked up a single customer yet." From the article: "The missing customers prove quite shocking when you consider that utility computing users must agree to be named in marketing programs as part of their contract with Sun - a fact learned by The Register and confirmed by a Sun spokeswoman. More than one year since it first started hyping the 'pay-for-use grid computing services' Sun is still weeks away from presenting a customer to the public. The program has proved much tougher to sell that Sun ever imagined."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lights On But No One Home At Sun Grid

Comments Filter:
  • Price too high? (Score:5, Informative)

    by GGardner ( 97375 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @11:39AM (#13889280)
    There was a lot of debate the last several times this was posted about Sun's $1/cpu-hour price, how TCO is a lot more than hardware cost, etc. Still, a google search reveals a bunch of other companies who lease out CPU farms (mainly intended for rendering), who charge less than $1/cpu-hour.
  • by Work Account ( 900793 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @11:41AM (#13889308) Journal
    Many intelligent developers like Bram Cohen, the creator of Bittorrent, didn't have much while they were developing.

    IIRC he spent a year or two living frugaly with relatives or friends because he knew he had a great idea and wanted it done as soon as possible.

    Sure, he could have used some money, but he wasn't about to get a job and then have the company own his $8.7 million dollar idea (and that's just the current market value not including future potential revenue streams).
  • by nweaver ( 113078 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @11:48AM (#13889360) Homepage
    If you have tasks that can be done on compute farms, computer farms and clusters have gotten relatively easy to manage and deploy and are CHEAP.

    Sun's charge of what, $1/CPU-hour is just way way way out of line compared with what you can build yourself (using dual core, dual processor athlons from Sun, for example), if you have any consistant demand.
  • by abbyhoffman ( 533625 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @11:52AM (#13889385)
    I've looked into grid computing a few times and ran a few clients as well. It seems that Jiva [jivaworks.com] does the same exact thing, but much cheaper. Then again there is also Parabon [parabon.com] and united devices [ud.com], though they tend to charge even more than Sun.
  • by Guspaz ( 556486 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @11:52AM (#13889388)
    No, he did so because he focuses on a problem to solve at the expense of other things. He didn't intend to turn BitTorrent into a business, and only founded the company because his father kept bugging him about it. He has Asbergers, a form of Autism, and it's an obsession with solving a problem that leads him to do what he does, not business sense.

    He didn't sit down and said "Hey, I have this great idea for content distribution that I think I can make money from."

    He's said this numerous times in various interviews.
  • by Animats ( 122034 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @12:00PM (#13889456) Homepage
    There used to be a scientific time sharing industry, with mainframe computer time rented by the minute. It's dead. Most commercial jobs you can do on PCs. If you have an ongoing need for more crunch power than that, you can get your own computing power, and it will be cheaper than renting it. The market for huge numbers of intermittent cycles is weak to nonexistent. The basic problem is that there just aren't many companies with giant number-crunching jobs for which they are willing to pay. For the same reason, there are very few privately owned supercomputers. There was a "grid computing" utility about two years ago, before Sun tried it, and they didn't get customers either.

    Sun's "grid computing" operation seems to be an attempt to find a use for unsold Sun servers, or at least to avoid writing their value down to scrap prices.

    f you went to a big hosting company and said you wanted a thousand unlimited-CPU-at-low-priority shared hosting accounts, valid only from 2300 to 0700, you could probably get a really good price. If "grid computing" were useful, somebody would be doing this. All those nearly idle CPUs could be doing something.

    There's a successful grid computing company: Akamai [akamai.com]. What they sell is distributed hosting and cacheing, which they call "Akamai On Demand Managed Services". When the web site for the World Cup or NASCAR or Britney is getting millions of hits per hour during some special event, thousands of Akamai servers switch to serving those pages to handle the transient load. That's a successful "grid" application, and it's been working for years.

    Akamai does more than serve pages. You can run your business logic, in Java, on their servers. So they're already set up to run user code on their grid. If anybody is going to sell grid computing profitably, it's Akamai. They're all set up to do it. Yet they don't.

  • Re:Duh.. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Guspaz ( 556486 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @12:03PM (#13889474)
    Exactly. Do some math. I need a task done, and it is going to take 1 million CPU hours. Maybe I need to render a movie or something. I need it all done in 1 month.

    Well, I could pay Sun a million dollars for ~1400 CPUs for a month, or I could spend about a million dollars and get 350 dual-processor dual-core Opterons, use them for a month, and then sell them at pretty close to retail, bringing my costs to way under a million dollars.

    Or you can keep them and use them for more projects.

    Either way, Sun's solution isn't really cheaper than a company doing it yourself. It's more expensive than buying the hardware yourself and paying some people to set it up. This is why when small companies need to render EFX for a movie, they buy up a lot of hardware, use it to make the movie, and then sell it off again. It's cheaper that way. They did this for Riddick.
  • Re:Price too high? (Score:3, Informative)

    by southpolesammy ( 150094 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @12:16PM (#13889575) Journal
    For those of you too lazy to do the math, this comes out to $8,760/cpu/yr, or for a typical 2-way server, $17,520/yr. Over a typical 3-year lifecycle (YMMV), this is $52,560 in expense for a 2-CPU server. Of course, this includes administration of the service, such as backups, sysadmin, power, data center space, etc...

    Compare this to buying a 2-way Sun V240 [sun.com] at about $7,245 (pre-discount), and you have $45,315 worth of TCO cost-savings to justify to management over the same 3-year window to make this worthwhile. Now I don't pretend to speak for others, but our SA's administer multiple systems, typically at least 20/SA, so unless your SA's make more than $300k/yr, I can't see this being feasible.
  • Re:Ha ha (Score:3, Informative)

    by Lucractius ( 649116 ) <Lucractius&gmail,com> on Thursday October 27, 2005 @01:16PM (#13890163) Journal
    while its possible to use this for rendering ill repeat again the words of others. Its not meant for people wanting to run rendering. Instead for people that need short term high volume proccessing at itermittent intervals.

    Say a small (but lucrative) investment firm with cash to spare but not enough to manage an IT project the size they need for the simulations they need about 25000 hours for every 3 months and that would be sitting idle the rest of the time.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 27, 2005 @01:40PM (#13890388)
    I've just finished the working-in-industry year of my degree, and the place I was working at was very enthusiastic about the Sun Grid; the problem was that they found it rather hard to port their (Linux and Solaris) software over to it. Don't ask me why, I wasn't in that team.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 27, 2005 @03:03PM (#13891150)
    I have a friend who works at Sun, and just today he (and other employees) received an email from Schwartz saying:
    In less than two weeks, Sun will officially unveil the world's first true computing utility. It's taken nearly a full year to build, and will be the only computing service of its kind.
    So Sun hasn't officially opened up the grid for business yet. Given that, it seems par for the course that they wouldn't yet have customers.
  • by Znork ( 31774 ) on Thursday October 27, 2005 @03:19PM (#13891331)
    "Unfortunatly, it has a negative effect on the value of programming jobs"

    It's not quite that simple. When you free up resources spent basically reimplementing the same wheel the last decade, you also free up the resources spent by other companies buying that wheel. That means the other companies suddenly have more available resources they can spend on custom software improving their own business. Or they can lower their prices, in the end leading to you getting more value for your paycheck.

    In the end, any increase in actual wealth for society as a whole is driven by things getting cheaper to produce. When you eventually approach a zero cost due to the nature of an infinitely reproducible product, you have effectively ended scarcity for that product and there is a permanent increase in wealth for society.

    Good for businesses, good for consumers, good for programmers who can move on to new things instead.

    Perhaps we'll eventually run out of that many new things to do, but that will mean we've also run out of scarcity. And when there is no scarcity, well, having some more free time would probably do wonders for the average programmers stress levels.

Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.

Working...