

Microsoft Competes In Supercomputer Market 464
HoboMaster writes "Microsoft is releasing a public beta of Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003 in their first attempt to compete in the supercomputer OS market. Gates is planned to speak at the 2005 Supercomputer Conference, which will be Microsoft's first appearance at the conference. Gates, as always, has high hopes for this new version of Windows, even claiming it to be as powerful and easier to use than Linux."
oh boy (Score:5, Funny)
Re:oh boy (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:oh boy (Score:5, Funny)
Re:oh boy (Score:3, Funny)
Re:oh boy (Score:3, Funny)
q. "why do i need to buy a new computer?"
a. "so you can reboot windows faster."
Re:oh boy (Score:3, Funny)
Finally! Some truth in advertising!
Re:what really happened (Score:4, Funny)
Re:oh boy (Score:3, Funny)
Confused (Score:5, Funny)
Yes? Where is the part about the high hopes for this operating system?
Re:Confused (Score:3)
That would be the "as powerful" part.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Confused (Score:2)
Well, I'm kinda excited about the thought of having more computers crash faster. Providing more in less time should surely be desirable by the public.
As a side note I wonder if there is a "Quickest computer crash" Guiness World Record? (well, for a system not in development)
I wouldn't trust Bill Gates (Score:2, Funny)
First thing one associates with that name... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:First thing one associates with that name... (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe Linux... (Score:5, Informative)
And I can bet it won't be included with their client systems.
The difference (Score:2)
(Engineering is highlighted because that is my area of expertise - company I work for does high fidelity simulation in both Linux and Windows... but few if any companies in the engineering world work under OS X)
-everphilski-
Re:The difference (Score:3, Insightful)
Science and engineering are *not* the only places where supercomputers matter. You're just bias. Just watch the making of documentary for epIII of star wars, and look at all the shiny G5's hooked up to xserve's with awsome apple cinema display's. Science and engineering may be tilted heavily to windows and linux, but movie editing, 3d rendering etc are even more so geared to osx (well, not as much 3d rendering as
Re:The difference (Score:5, Informative)
Better yet, watch the end credits - look for the huge AMD logo. Episode III was rendered on Opterons, not XServes.
Re:Maybe Linux... (Score:2)
Jedidiah.
Wake up, Bill (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wake up, Bill (Score:4, Interesting)
Mark
Re:Wake up, Bill (Score:5, Funny)
Bill has a point. (Score:2)
If Microsoft can make inroads into newer supercomputing arenas with newer people who don't want to learn Linux, etc... they may have a market. I say it half sarcastically because I agree with you, yet I can see where Microsoft is taking this.
-everphilski-
Re:Bill has a point. (Score:3, Funny)
You only need to go: Create a form. Drag the AtomView object to the form.
Dim MyAtom(1E100)
For i = 1 to 1E100
My Atom(i) = MSAtom.new(x,y)
Next
Atom(0).Nucleus.Split
Who wants to learn C, and all those t
Re:Bill has a point. (Score:3, Funny)
Sorry, you're right. Why would anyone run poorly designed, bloated, unsuited software that could make even the fastest hardware seem slow?
Re:Bill has a point. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wake up, Bill (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Wake up, Bill (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wake up, Bill (Score:2)
Which one of these has the biggest impact on overall performance? Certainly not "ease of using", which is what Bill says he's solved.
Re:Wake up, Bill (Score:5, Insightful)
MS Excels at letting the computer illiterate do whatever MS has envisioned they might. You wanna connect to the internet via DSL? No problem. You wanna write an email to Grandma? No problem. You wanna do something that MS hasn't thought of yet? BIG Problem.
Pretty much *anything* you do with a cluster is gonna be custom, "MS hasn't thought of this" stuff, and so will be harder to use, not easier.
Why do I get the feeling that it will have a little version of Clippy asking "It looks like you're doing climatology variance research. Would you like me to help you model your data?"
Re:Wake up, Bill (Score:5, Funny)
Come on now. You and I both know that's BS.
Re:Wake up, Bill (Score:2)
Re:Wake up, Bill (Score:5, Informative)
Obviously the comment about "easier to use" is inane when talking about supercomputers, but that quote was invented by the submitter. What the director of the HPC unit (not Gates) actually said was "...easier to integrate into what they are already doing".
Re:Wake up, Bill (Score:3, Insightful)
Now that CRAY is made by AMD (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Now that CRAY is made by AMD (Score:3, Funny)
I suspect that even with a Beowulf cluster of Bill Gates, the end results would still be described as "micro" and "soft".
Marketing (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Marketing (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed I cannot think of *any* reason why one would want Windows on an HPC cluster. Indeed, with Microsoft's reliance on COM and IPC stuff, I would be highly skeptical of using the Windows development environment in these cases. Yes, async I/O might be more mature on Windows, but I think that on the whole, Linux is a better choice.
As for the ease of use factor. This is a product that is really only needed by a few highly technical people. Ease of use for beginners is not important here. Ease of use by experienced UNIX admins is. Sadly Windows fails here pretty badly. After all not everyone needs to build a Beowulf cluster with licensed Windows software in their basement and the intensive number crunching apps that such clusters are used for are the exception rather than the rule.
Finally.....
Why not take Windows Server 2003 Standard or even XP Pro (for fewer than 10 nodes), install SFU 3.5 and PVM and build your cluster that way? It seems that this would be better for the market than this new product which seems to be the worst of both worlds.
This is just about saying "Anything Linux can do Windows can do better" rather than pursuing any reasonable business plan.
Re:Marketing (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Marketing (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, I disagree with you here. To be a quality node in a supercomputer, I would think you would want a lightweight kernel with an efficient and simple programing environment. You want the ability to strip down everything you don't need and keep everything as simple as possible.
This sort of design has absolut
*yawn* (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:*yawn* (Score:2)
Well, this makes sense... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Well, this makes sense... (Score:2)
Piffle (Score:3, Insightful)
I find Linux ease of use to be perfectly acceptable, and since they are not claiming better performance, I don't see an advantage.
NY Times Article (free reg. required) (Score:5, Interesting)
"In January a group of Microsoft researchers set out to discover how much computing power they could buy for less than $4,000 at a standard online retailer. They found the answer at NewEgg.com, where they were able to purchase - for just $3,632 - 9.5 gigaflops of computing speed. That is the amount of computing power offered by a Cray Y-MP supercomputer in 1991 at a cost of $40 million."
Re:NY Times Article (free reg. required) (Score:2)
Has th NY Times stopped asking people outside the US to register, becaause the last couple of times I've visited they havn't asked me, besideds, even when they used to, I used BugMeNot [bugmenot.com]
Re:NY Times Article (free reg. required) (Score:3, Interesting)
Somehow I think Windows Compute Cluster(fsck) Server 2003 does not run on the above hardware. Quick, there was just a November Top 500 list a
Re:NY Times Article (free reg. required) (Score:3, Interesting)
Now take into account an extra $25,000 (
Better than Moore's law? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not drawing any conclusions, just pointing this out.
Cause this makes sense! (Score:2, Funny)
Where could one find a drug (Score:2)
Will it have a GUI (Score:2)
Benefits of the GUI (Score:2)
-everphilski-
Re:Benefits of the GUI (Score:2)
Right and wrong. (Score:2, Insightful)
However, there is no upside to a GUI. It offers a way for developers to write software that is difficult and time consuming to administer, and requires a much better connection for remote administration than ssh does. I have never found a single graphical tool that helps me admin anything, they are always a pain.
Re:Right and wrong. (Score:3, Informative)
However, there's some things that gain great benefit from a GUI. Any sort of large scale user management, especially with a directory serv
Gates' other endeavours (Score:2)
Gates is also authoring a new book called "Supercomputing For Dummies", for all those super-computer admins who are frightened by command prompts.
Share nothing cluster? (Score:3, Informative)
Yesterday's Future Tomorrow! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, they're doing it to maintain the "2003" branding of the flagship server. But why, less than two months before the end of 2005, are they not even trying to sound modern?
It's no surprise... (Score:2)
Re:It's no surprise... (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't think so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Secondly, I, like many developers, have been running MPI programs on Linux clusters for some time now. What's my incentive to switch? All I've got is penalties, like having to buy software and stuff. MPI is already free, open source software. So now MS sticks it in their OS and sell it as a new platform?
At least for me, this is too little, too late. I'll do what I've been doing, which is run my parallel code on Linux.
Right.... (Score:2, Funny)
until (Score:4, Insightful)
i've never heard of the supercomputing crowd complaining about ease of use, they are looking for more calculations for less money, and for that linux/unix is probably still the best choice. there's no reason to pay thousands for an OS that doesn't increase your performance any further than an OS that costs $0
Two quotes (Score:2)
Super Windows for Computers (Score:2)
How about you develop a "Super Windows"(TM) for normal PCs instead?
Why a Windows for Supercomputer? Because they make superior bot nets?
These are just some questions
Metrics: BSPS (Score:5, Funny)
The Windows Compute Cluster 2003 Cycle (Score:4, Insightful)
2. PHB makes case to execs, gets capital for an 80-node WCC2K3 cluster for eleventy billion dollars, thanks to Licensing 7.
3. Admins shake their heads in disdain, get the thing running, and walk away.
4. Developers waste time and resources reinventing the wheel.
5. Nodes start to get rooted because the admins didn't harden the system.
6. Organized crime groups use nodes to DDoS websites in the name of extortion.
7.
8. Profit! (for Microsoft, at least).
"Next week windows will be better" (Score:5, Insightful)
Amazingly the press continue to take Microsoft at face value on annoucing their version as better when they don't release what they announce.
So sure MS is better at supercomputers... I mean they have such a history in it, just look at the top 500 its just littered with MS boxes.
This isn't Windows v Linux, this is MS Research v IBM Research. The people behind the CPU, Relational databases, reliable messaging and of course the huge amount of work on massively scalable computers. If MS had real ability they'd be working with the big processing boys from the goverment and weather prediction areas.
am I the only one ... (Score:2)
I could have sworn it actually read, "Microsoft Complete Cluster F**k Server 2003"
And, if you think about it... my misinterpretation might actually be closer to the truth.
about time? (Score:3)
An excellent use for these MS supercomputers is to host xbox MMORPGs that enable 10 million players at a time reenacting the opening fight scene from Lord of the Rings: FOTR. Each player will run towards the center, clash, fight and most likely die within the first 30 seconds of gameplay.
Comments on others' comments (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the advantage of a MS solution might be ease-of-use, especially in server clusters that are up for hire (that is, up for timesharing). If you are some group performing research that requries lots of power but aren't focused in a CS-related field, you may not have the resources to go use the (often arcane) parallel (MPI) debuggers etc. and churn out a top-grade program for a supercomputer. An MS solution might indeed be cheaper OVERALL because of time-to-solution (time = money). Let's face it, VS.NET is a dream to code in - compared to other well-featured IDE's like Eclipse, it is light-weight, easier to use (Eclipse has major bloat issues), etc. So who knows - as the article mentions, it might indeed become part of an end-to-end scientific process, where the computational parts seamlessly fit in.
Furthermore, everyone who is talking about licenses per processor are not thinking properly...do you really think they would achieve penetration with the barrier to using the software so high? Of course not! Instead of speculating negatively, let's just wait and see what the licensing programs are when the product is released.
My 2 cents
Purse Strings? (Score:3, Insightful)
Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003 ... (Score:3, Funny)
Structure of the stack (Score:3, Interesting)
First, and most important for users, what would be the APIs provided. Would Microsoft package MPI? PVM? Would they use a proprietary technology? XML based technologies are way too heavy for this application.
Second, what interconnect transports would be provided? VIA, Globus, IB, good old stinky rsh encapsulation? What about independent vendors like Myricom and Dolphin? Would these companies be willing to support a substantially different architecture? Would there be enough customer demand for them to support Compute Cluster Server at the outset (MPICH-GM is old old old for Windows, Dolphonics and Scali are pretty well exclusively LINUX)?
Third, what software will Microsoft be providing for remote batch management? You'd need a secure remote shell, good scripting functionality, non-GUI device management, etc.
Lastly, how suitable is the NT kernel to doing this sort of work? VMS was ahead of basically everyone when it came to clustering technology, yet _nobody_ uses or used it for parallel processing. What are the lessons that can be applied to NT?
There are a few clusters built on NT, but most of the ones mentioned on the Beowulf mailing list (and they are few) are networks of workstations with CONDOR installed which do double duty as computer clusters at night.
The title is wrong. (Score:3, Insightful)
To give an idea, 128 nodes will give you at most 512 processors (more becomes EXTREMELY inefficient). 512 processors will net you a place between 300 and 500 on the current top 500 list. This will be very different on the list to be released six months for now... such small clusters might not even show up.
Then there is the user group of HPC systems. It is a VERYsmall market, with a userbase, a group of anministrators and a group of manufacturers traditionally used to UNIX, and now migrating to Linux in droves. Windows is not even duscussed. The announcement of the Windows Compute Cluster edition was cause for great hilarity at the workplace, where jokes like parallel word/excel and high-performance visual basic started floating around. No one will take Microsoft serious in that market.
Perhaps Microsoft will sell some systems to some manufacturers, like in the automotive or pharmaceutical industry. But these guys already know the ways to traditional vendors selling them Linux clusters, vendors like SGI for instance. CHeck the SGI Manufacturing [sgi.com] page.
So... will Microsoft compete? So far, they announced an operating system for clusters. Important questions remain:
Re:Little redundant... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You underestimate Bill Gates (Score:5, Funny)
It's kind of like the way the GUI opened up computing to a lot of people who found a command line interface daunting, to say the least.
Superclippy: It seems you're trying to factor large prime numbers. Would you like to engage the Microsoft Compute Cluster interface?
Re:You misunderestimate Bill Gates (Score:3, Insightful)
Again, i think the original writer was correct. Supercomputers are for enterprises and government agencies. Even some medium size businesses would have a cluster. But they all have a fulltime sys admin. And if the extent of that sys admins abilities is just a MCSE cert, then god help your company when the latest exploit hits.
Also, keep in mind that i
Re:Little redundant... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Little redundant... (Score:3, Informative)
You do get an reaction - the icon is selected.
You don't always want to open something when you click on it. Sometimes (mostly, I'd wager) you just want to select it for further manipulation.
Why settle for a poor interface just because it's the Windows way? (No doubt there's a way to change KDE's default behav
Clippy: "It looks like you want a super cluster." (Score:3, Interesting)
At this level, the extra wizards and such just don't matter.
Re:How much? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:How much? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How much? (Score:5, Interesting)
Excuse me while I find my tinfoil hat....
What if MS is doing this so that it can strongarm universities and research institutions? Something like going to the bean counters and saying "hey, we have this great new OS for supercomputers - we'll give you a reduced rate on it, *AND* a reduced rate on the licenses for the rest of your desktops, if you just agree to kick that smelly, communistic, viral, legally-dubious Linux off your clusters! (Did we mention that if you're using Linux, you might have to give up all your precioussss IP?)"
Re:How much? (Score:5, Insightful)
And even if MS were so compelled, what really is in it for Redmond? It's probably the smallest market in the world, with a customer base measured in the thousands, and one that already has access to either operating systems with a long multicomputing heritage or to clustered Linux systems that, for the kinds of guys that set up and maintain supercomputer clusters, offers no unreasonable difficulties as far as usability.
I think what we have here is Gates' inferiority complex towards Linux. He desperately wants to have MS in every market, and can't stand the thought of that open source demon increasingly being utilized, so he'll waste money on a product that, even if it were to be a success within that marketplace, would provide an outrageously small amount of revenue.
I suppose MS has money to burn, but if I had that much money to piss away, I'd try to take over the pocket calculator or security alarm markets.
Re:How much? (Score:5, Insightful)
They bring very little value to the back end. A typical distributed app is not a rich UI client that needs lots of Windows APIs to play DRM'd movies, so Windows has no advantage there. It's a C, C++, or Fortan (mixed, even) job running MPI over some specialized interconnect hardware.
You also need a good parallel file system which I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that CIFS is probably not the optimal choice - any real system will probably be using a dedicated filer.
However, their strong suit in this space are tools like IDEs. If they can convince folks that using Windows as a front-end to development, then they can make some good inroads.
Right now the supercomputing folks are starting to get interested in Eclipse, and they're trying to head that off, not to mention small ISV's like us [etnus.com].
The first hit of heroin's always free... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sure Microsoft will do what it always does, and cheat.
Bill and Steve will see to it that a high-profile research centre (e.g. a university) will get a free supercomputer with a free Supercomputer Edition(TM) of Windows(TM) to play with and there will be much fanfare and positive publicity in the press.
Just like when SGI and intel gave NASA a free 10240-processor Altix (made of itanics).
Re:How much? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:How much? (Score:2)
Re:ummm, yeah, right.... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:ummm, yeah, right.... (Score:2)
I'm sure running your own OS would be a breach of our 'terms of use' for using the uni computers, but I don't think they thought about it when writing them
Re:Zombie Cluster... (Score:2)
Re:Claiming? (Score:3, Interesting)
My brother had exactly the same problem on his Windows PC, i.e we can both see the WAN, but can't connect to the internet via the router. He solved his problem before I started installing Ubuntu, so the two arn't related, but Windows is far from perfect, and Linux is far from the disaster you paint it as.
Re:Claiming? (Score:3, Insightful)
What fantasy world do you live in where installing Windows and several additional third-party drivers is "easy"? At least with linux, you can generally avoid most of the dr
If you want easy of use pick *ANYTHING* but Apple (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not the OS. (Score:2)