Microsoft Bob, version 8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImaNihilist

It's binary compatible. You can use all the Linux tools. It's very easy to do so.

---

I'm pretty sure it's not actually binary compatible. FreeBSD can be binary compatible (but it wasn't the default option last I checked), but I can't find a source that says OSX is binary compatible with Linux.

I don't have OSX handy, but I'm pretty sure if I copied, say, the "ls" command from a Linux box to OSX that I could just run it.

Still, most FOSS tools either compile cleanly, have already been made to compile cleanly, or are fairly simple ports.

If there is some hidden (or not) binary compatibility, I'd love to see a link and read more about it.

I was under the impression it was. I could be mistaken. That impression may be because I've never run into an issue where I couldn't run something. It's an assumption based on usage, which may not be correct.

I've never run into a situation where something would break between say, Debian and OS X.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick_B

OSX would be fairly well adept at all of this. Likely it would cost more and you would have to work around some differences in MPI--which, depending on the complexity, can be pretty touchy moving from one environment to any other environment even if it's similar, but it might not be as *shudder*-worthy as you think.

Still, I think, economically, Linux is the best choice (and even more so since you are using and familiar with it), but thought I'd throw that in...

4 or 5 years ago in college I would frequently run simulations on the under-utilized OSX lab because the machines were faster and no-one ever used them. It was fairly basic C++, but I don't think it ever required source modification, just compiler tweaking.

---

The thing is that most of the CFD codes are NASA-funded/built and are built on fairly standard sets of compilers (like Portland Group or gcc) and MPI (like OpenMPI) since others by HP and IBM and Intel are expensive. I run simulations using anywhere from 100 to 1000+ cores and that's not doable with Macs... not on practical levels anyway...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by proxops-pete

The thing is that most of the CFD codes are NASA-funded/built and are built on fairly standard sets of compilers (like Portland Group or gcc) and MPI (like OpenMPI) since others by HP and IBM and Intel are expensive. I run simulations using anywhere from 100 to 1000+ cores and that's not doable with Macs... not on practical levels anyway...

---

What does NASA use? Their own farm?

Yes... and other companies have their own... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by proxops-pete

Yes... and other companies have their own... ;)

---

Do you happen to know what it's built with?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by proxops-pete

The thing is that most of the CFD codes are NASA-funded/built and are built on fairly standard sets of compilers (like Portland Group or gcc) and MPI (like OpenMPI) since others by HP and IBM and Intel are expensive. I run simulations using anywhere from 100 to 1000+ cores and that's not doable with Macs... not on practical levels anyway...

---

Yeah, I know it's not practical. Although, wasn't there an HPC some years back built on xserves? I doubt it was running OSX anyway.

gcc and OpenMPI should both work with OSX, though. You might get something up and running on 8 cores.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick_B

Yeah, I know it's not practical. Although, wasn't there an HPC some years back built on xserves? I doubt it was running OSX anyway.

gcc and OpenMPI should both work with OSX, though. You might get something up and running on 8 cores.

---

8 cores? LOL... we have been running on nodes with 12-cores and 48 GB of memory... and I typically use at least 40 up to 200 nodes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImaNihilist

Do you happen to know what it's built with?

---

Do you mean the OS? or hardware? It's a flavor of Linux that I cant' disclose... and it's based on Intel's 6-core processors...

Being that age was brought up, I'm 36.

Everyone manages Windows Servers through a GUI. I don't know what you're smokin Ima. Yes Powershell is awesome at managing certain things, such as mass enabling litigation hold on Exchange mailboxes or the like. But almost all Windows administrative tasks are performed through a GUI to this day.

We nonstop sell Windows servers, windows desktops and laptops, and the MS Office Suite to SMBs. To say that all computing is done through a browser is only if you are a hipster who sits on youtube all day. I just don't see this world you speak of Ima where "Applications have largely been de-coupled from the OS". There has certainly been progress but it's nowhere near as evolved as you say it is.

I agree with Geforce255 on this issue wholeheartedly. Are there lots of web apps now that can replace other apps sure. I don't know a single business that runs even the majority of their business off of web apps.

Take something as simple as SMB accounting. Quickbooks is one of the most, if noo the most popular accounting package we run into for businesses under 100 users. Is there a web version? Yup. It sucks. You lose all ability to integrate with other line of business apps. It doesn't do everything the Windows install does. You have to pay per user, per company file, and some companies have many, many company files. It just doesn't work well at all. The only server that Quickbooks can even be installed on is a Windows Server.

People that try Google Apps? They hate it, every single one of them. They want MS Office. Even MS's own Office Web Apps aren't very liked, but better than Google Apps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImaNihilist

How old are you? What industry do you work in? You have another thread about RDP, but who manages a server through a UI? Are you trying to manage an old NT server?

All of this is done through the web today. No one is buying into proprietary desktop software to do this. I haven't even SEEN that kind of software in years. Are you talking about desktop executables?

You're views on computing are very…10-15 years ago. They still apply to giant multinationals and who are stuck 10 years in the past, but even the multinationals are getting away from all that baggage.

---

I SEE this every day. There is so much wrong with this quote. I swear it's like you are a seer looking 15 years into the future.

I do think we will continue to see growth in the browser. It just seems to me that Ima is 15-20 years into the future.



And on Windows 8, well it sucks. It makes plenty of sense on a phone or a tablet, or anything with an inferior user interface such as touchscreen or 360 controller. However I don't interact with my PC in that way. I use a mouse and Keyboard. If you interact with different devices in different ways, why should the UI be the same? It makes no sense. Your UI should be designed to match the input methods, period.

Apple has done this better. I like how they are trying to bring elements of iOS into Lion and such but they aren't just making it a single unified OS like MS is trying to do.

When I say "browser" I'm not talking about just Google Apps. I'm not talking exclusively about web apps, or even the Internet.

At the enterprise level, a large number of applications that just 5 years ago used to only exist as custom executables are now just shells rendering HTML and Javascript. They have an API that partners can integrate with. It does everything the old software did, only much faster and the speed of the client no longer matters. They may be talking to a local server, they may be talking to the internet, they may be connecting to a private virtualized infrastructure. You had these classical software companies, which made CRM and ERP software for Windows and they've been forced (arguably for the better) to move to web-based, or perhaps a better word is "web influenced" software and infrastructure. The old model is dying. Fast.

Not every piece or type of software has successfully made that transition, but Quickbooks and Intuit are a great example of a company that knows the old model is approaching EOL rapidly. 10 years ago TurboTax was a desktop app you had to install. Today most of their business comes from the web version. Quickbooks itself faces immense pressure from startups like Xero, and even Mint (on the personal side) wich they bought. And while they still sell the boxed version, a quick glance at their website shows you that's not a priority anymore. Sales of the boxed version are likely declining year over year.

10-15 years? More like 2-3. 15 years ago we were on Windows 98. 15 years from now, I can't say. But today you've got companies like Saleforce and Jive really changing software models. Look at Office365. Have you ever heard someone who wasn't in IT say, "Man, I really love our email server. It's always so reliable." No, all people do is complain about how much an pain in the *** it is to manage an Exchange server. Now Microsoft is saying, hey, we'll do it for you.

i think with win8, microsoft is betting on tablets slowly taking over laptops as the dominant consumer device.

back when tablets were first introduced, microsoft tried to shoe-horn their desktop OS (ie windows tablet edition) into the tablet form factor and failed (similar to how awful windows mobile up to v 6.5 were for smartphones). the robust desktop UI just didnt fit with the input methods available on a tablet or smartphone. apple got the right idea with iOS and soon everyone was making dedicated mobile OS's. apple has proven that a large percentage of the population is open to using a tablet as their main internet device unfortunately, iOS/Android/WM7 come up a bit short when trying to emulate some of the functions of a true desktop OS. thats where win8 comes in.... we have a full blown desktop OS with a UI built ground up to be supported by high res tablet devices. if microsoft's gamble pays off, win8 will completely wipe the floor with iOS/Android in terms of performance and functionality... that is if tablets do continue to dominate and if Apple and Google decide not to go the same route.

you guys in this thread are arguing about the business and IT requirements of an OS which will always be supported through more traditional channels: ie enterprise/professional edition, linux/unix, etc...

most people do use their computers to mostly check youtube and facebook (even in an office athmosphere)... even basic RDP/VNC can be handled with a pure mobile OS like iOS or android using the right apps and cloud software. i believe win8's intention is to bridge the gap a bit more

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImaNihilist

When I say "browser" I'm not talking about just Google Apps. I'm not talking exclusively about web apps, or even the Internet.

At the enterprise level, a large number of applications that just 5 years ago used to only exist as custom executables are now just shells rendering HTML and Javascript. They have an API that partners can integrate with. It does everything the old software did, only much faster and the speed of the client no longer matters. They may be talking to a local server, they may be talking to the internet, they may be connecting to a private virtualized infrastructure. You had these classical software companies, which made CRM and ERP software for Windows and they've been forced (arguably for the better) to move to web-based, or perhaps a better word is "web influenced" software and infrastructure. The old model is dying. Fast.

Not every piece or type of software has successfully made that transition, but Quickbooks and Intuit are a great example of a company that knows the old model is approaching EOL rapidly. 10 years ago TurboTax was a desktop app you had to install. Today most of their business comes from the web version. Quickbooks itself faces immense pressure from startups like Xero, and even Mint (on the personal side) wich they bought. And while they still sell the boxed version, a quick glance at their website shows you that's not a priority anymore. Sales of the boxed version are likely declining year over year.

10-15 years? More like 2-3. 15 years ago we were on Windows 98. 15 years from now, I can't say. But today you've got companies like Saleforce and Jive really changing software models. Look at Office365. Have you ever heard someone who wasn't in IT say, "Man, I really love our email server. It's always so reliable." No, all people do is complain about how much an pain in the *** it is to manage an Exchange server. Now Microsoft is saying, hey, we'll do it for you.

---

I deploy the eff out of 365. In reality though that is just a remote hosted server that we dont have to worry about backing up or keeping up. We still have to remote powershell into it to do tasks that can't be done in the web gui. Jive is cool, we are currently in the middle of our first deployment. I still wouldn't recommend it for most businesses for a multitude of reasons.

Yes Cloud Services are 100% the future. Boxed product is dead and subscriptions and "web influenced" software are here to stay.

I don't really agree with 2-3 years. It's going to be longer than that. We still deploy tons of local executables.

Hell even with Adobe I just converted to Creative Cloud and here I sit installing all my executables. Local executables are going to be around for a long long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vertices

I don't really agree with 2-3 years. It's going to be longer than that. We still deploy tons of local executables.

Hell even with Adobe I just converted to Creative Cloud and here I sit installing all my executables. Local executables are going to be around for a long long time.

---

Oh, I don't doubt it. Anything that needs GPU resources still has to be done locally. Anything that is latency sensitive (drawing) has to be done locally. Anything that needs to access system components needs to be local.

But because of the move to browser based software, you aren't nearly as tied to the OS as you used to be. You used to need Windows because all of your applications needed Windows, in some cases the latest version of Windows. Now half of your applications can be de-coupled. CRM, ERP, accounting, payroll, chat, email, filesharing, etc.. You aren't tied to Windows in the same way. You may not be tied to them at all.

Quickbooks is actually a great example. 15 years ago you had Quicken for Windows. Did they even have a Mac version back then? Now you've got Quickbooks for Windows, Mac, Web, Android, iPhone, and BlackBerry. That's what I mean by de-coupled, and that's the case with a lot of software today. Maybe even most. In 2-3 years that's going to be the vast majority. I'm not saying that every piece of software is going to run on 6 platforms, far from it, but the era of "Windows Only" is gone for anything that isn't specialized. If you are starting a new company today, from manufacturing to creative, you have a lot of options to consider. You don't need to be, and wouldn't want to be, a Windows-only organization that hosts everything internally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImaNihilist

Oh, I don't doubt it. Anything that needs GPU resources still has to be done locally. Anything that is latency sensitive (drawing) has to be done locally. Anything that needs to access system components needs to be local.

But because of the move to browser based software, you aren't nearly as tied to the OS as you used to be. You used to need Windows because all of your applications needed Windows, in some cases the latest version of Windows. Now half of your applications can be de-coupled. CRM, ERP, accounting, payroll, chat, email, filesharing, etc.. You aren't tied to Windows in the same way. You may not be tied to them at all.

Quickbooks is actually a great example. 15 years ago you had Quicken for Windows. Did they even have a Mac version back then? Now you've got Quickbooks for Windows, Mac, Web, Android, iPhone, and BlackBerry. That's what I mean by de-coupled, and that's the case with a lot of software today. Maybe even most. In 2-3 years that's going to be the vast majority. I'm not saying that every piece of software is going to run on 6 platforms, far from it, but the era of "Windows Only" is gone for anything that isn't specialized. If you are starting a new company today, from manufacturing to creative, you have a lot of options to consider. You don't need to be, and wouldn't want to be, a Windows-only organization that hosts everything internally.

---

I agree with all of these statements, but they are a far cry from what you started out saying lol. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImaNihilist

A matter of bandwidth to where?

The "compilation or various elements" is going to be done much faster on a server with a bucket of CPUs than it is on a local system. The only bandwidth needed is the bandwidth to display characters on the screen.

I think I understand where you are coming from now though. Gotta keep that expensive CRM running and make a case for it. Can't let the company switch to a cheaper solution.

---

Any organization that would use ERP and CRM have sufficient processing power. I don't know what you mean by "local system." But I lean toward Dell equipment and have mostly R900 class. Typically they are quad Xeon quad cores or 64 effective cores per box.

The issue is that the data has to be pushed across the wire. With a gig or 10 gig ethernet connection, no big deal. On a 1.5mbps T1, it's suddenly a different story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vertices

I agree with all of these statements, but they are a far cry from what you started out saying lol. :)

---

I don't think so, really.

My first post in this thread was this:

Quote:

---

The OS itself isn't such a big deal. We no longer depend on the OS, or the OS vendor, to provide tools.

The success or failure of Windows 8 relies in the developer tools, and if they can win back developers. Microsoft used to make a lot of the software that worked with the OS. Internet Explorer, FrontPage, Outlook, Encarta, the rest of Office, Windows Media Player, etc.. None of that matters any more. MS Office is the only one that matters at all, even then not so much. DirectX is the only piece of software which can't be decoupled from Windows these days.

Don't know what people's problem is with Metro. It's different, but better in a world were we care more about apps than a desktop—which is the world we live in whether you like it or not

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geforce255

Any organization that would use ERP and CRM have sufficient processing power. I don't know what you mean by "local system." But I lean toward Dell equipment and have mostly R900 class. Typically they are quad Xeon quad cores or 64 effective cores per box.

The issue is that the data has to be pushed across the wire. With a gig or 10 gig ethernet connection, no big deal. On a 1.5mbps T1, it's suddenly a different story.

---

ERP and CRM are not bandwidth intensive…at all. It's all server and database driven. What businesses are investing in 64-core boxes and has a 1.5Mbps internet connection?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vertices

I deploy the eff out of 365.

---

glad to see you deploying office365 to all your users :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by proxops-pete

8 cores? LOL... we have been running on nodes with 12-cores and 48 GB of memory... and I typically use at least 40 up to 200 nodes.

---

I wasn't suggesting this was a solution. Just that gcc and OpenMPI run on OSX. I'm not attempting to convince you to do so. I said 8 cores because that's the biggest OSX box I know exists, lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick_B

I wasn't suggesting this was a solution. Just that gcc and OpenMPI run on OSX. I'm not attempting to convince you to do so. I said 8 cores because that's the biggest OSX box I know exists, lol.

---

Ah... my bad, then... I don't know of any other OS that could support such large level of parallel computing other than Linux... In my mind, MacOS and Windows just have too much memory overhead and things like PBSPro just won't be practical on them...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by proxops-pete

Ah... my bad, then... I don't know of any other OS that could support such large level of parallel computing other than Linux... In my mind, MacOS and Windows just have too much memory overhead and things like PBSPro just won't be practical on them...

---

Well, AIX and other Unixes, I suppose. Linux owns the market share, though.

I'm kind of curious what Windows HPC Server looks like. I don't think I'd care to use it, though.

Virginia Tech built an HPC from Mac G5s called System X. I believe it used OSX on the nodes. They still have a Mac hardware powered HPC, but it runs Linux now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick_B

Virginia Tech built an HPC from Mac G5s called System X. I believe it used OSX on the nodes. They still have a Mac hardware powered HPC, but it runs Linux now.

---

I bet they paid close to nothing since they are an educational institution... for commercial companies like us Boeing, I bet we'd pay way too much for both the Mac hardware and the software! >.<

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by proxops-pete

I bet they paid close to nothing since they are an educational institution... for commercial companies like us Boeing, I bet we'd pay way too much for both the Mac hardware and the software! >.<

---

Yeah, at the time in 2003, I guess System X was a top 10 HPC and cost 1/5th of the cost of the second most inexpensive HPC on the top 10 list (this did come from Apple's website/marketing, so take that into account). When I read that, I could only think "how could Mac be cheaper?"

Because nodes in HPCs tend to be really expensive compared to off the shelf systems, even when those systems are PowerMac G5s. I doubt Apple gave VT much more than the standard higher education discount. That's not usually something they do.

edit: also the cost of an HPC is way more than (cost per node x number of nodes)