What Are You Doing Right Now
-
@BRRABill said:
Getting ready to coach my first 4th/5th grade girls basketball practice.
Have fun. My six year old is in science class right now. Learning about the big cats.
-
@RojoLoco said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Why marketing companies should not make technical material.... they didn't even realize that when they were making an "authoritative" infographic that they were confused about virtualization being nine years old rather than the 51 years old that it is! NTG moved to virtualization prior to the beginning of their timeline! @andyw was writing virtualization in the 1990s!! It was required coursework with SUNY for freshman in the mid 1990s. Even Cornell was teaching it in engineering classes in 2001. In the 1990s it was already the standard for enterprise servers. VMware and Xen were even doing it for x86 long before 2006.
The mighty orange marketers have spoken!!! Virtualization has only been around 9 years!!!!! How dare you throw facts at their pretty infographics!!!!
How do you figure?
@scottalanmiller says virtualization has been around for 52 years.... OK fine, but to the masses it hasn't been. Sure it's been around longer than even the graphic shows... but the graphics point was to show that in a short amount of time - less than 10 years - the industry has moved to more than 70% virtualized. The amount of servers that were virtualized for the 40+ years before that was negligible.
-
@Dashrender said:
The amount of servers that were virtualized for the 40+ years before that was negligible.
Why do you think that? Other than the small "IA32 server boom" of ~1992 - 2002 where there wasn't enough power to virtualize causing a blip in the virtualization space in the SMB market, where were you seeing so many unvirtualized servers?
-
@Dashrender said:
OK fine, but to the masses it hasn't been.
To the masses it still isn't. We are talking about servers being virtualized, not grandma knowing the word without knowing what it means. The masses are not a factor here. Sure that might matter if you are marketing non-IT products, but that it matters for marketing doesn't mean it changes reality.
-
@Dashrender because we studied about VMware when I was getting MS certified, which I finished in 98 or 99. No, it wasn't in the hands of the masses, but it was in the hands of enterprise. If they meant to show the timeline of virtualization for joe and jane consumer, sure, it's much shorter, but they should point out that qualification.
-
@RojoLoco said:
If they meant to show the timeline of virtualization for joe and jane consumer, sure, it's much shorter, but they should point out that qualification.
And they shouldn't start the timeline yet because Joe and Jane Consumer aren't getting anything virtualized yet or anytime soon.
-
I definitely remember using VMWare workstation in the mid to late 90's but I definitely didn't know anyone running VM servers at that point. By 2002, sure, I knew a few, and Scott's right, it was on it's way in 2006...
-
@Dashrender said:
I definitely remember using VMWare workstation in the mid to late 90's but I definitely didn't know anyone running VM servers at that point. By 2002, sure, I knew a few, and Scott's right, it was on it's way in 2006...
The consulting firms I worked for in 2001 definitely were not deploying virtualization in anyway on x86/x64 hardware until sometime around 2005.
-
@Dashrender said:
I definitely remember using VMWare workstation in the mid to late 90's but I definitely didn't know anyone running VM servers at that point. By 2002, sure, I knew a few, and Scott's right, it was on it's way in 2006...
But VMware was super low end server stuff only back then. IA32 was never a serious component of the server landscape until after virtualization. It was virtualization that made AMD64 take off, not the other way around. The majority of servers back then were RISC and virtualization had long been the standard.
VMware was well known by 2002, even if people were not deploying it left and right, but the issue is that the IA32 landscape was not indicative of the industry.
-
@Dashrender said:
The consulting firms I worked for in 2001 definitely were not deploying virtualization in anyway on x86/x64 hardware until sometime around 2005.
AMD64 wasn't invented yet in 2001. You keep mentioning the one small platform that didn't have the power to do virtualization. The question is about as an industry, not for that one product line.
-
The industry I work in is the SMB, not the enterprise - so fine, I'll give you that the Enterprise has had virtualization for many decades, but SMB (which is the point of SW and Mangolassi - or so I thought) surely hasn't been using it but for just north of a decade.
-
@Dashrender said:
The industry I work in is the SMB, not the enterprise - so fine, I'll give you that the Enterprise has had virtualization for many decades, but SMB (which is the point of SW and Mangolassi - or so I thought) surely hasn't been using it but for just north of a decade.
Lots of the SMB was, even then. Back then the SMB didn't normally use IA32 servers either. IBM AS/400, RS/6000, Sparc, MIPS, Alpha and VMS VAX systems were common. Sure IA32 was popular too, more popular by 1994 for sure in the SMB, but the SMB only had a small window of not being virtualized in general and only some.
The article said obscurity. By 1998 even in the pure SMB virtualization was not obscure at all. It was something people did at home. Claiming that in 2006 it was obscure is absurd. It was old hat even in the pure SMB IA32 circles by then.
-
To give some perspective again... Solaris went to 100% virtualized with containers (like Docker today) in 2004. Not offering it as an option, they stopped offering anything else at that point.
-
hmm... OK I knew many SMBs who did have an AS400 - I have no idea if they used virtualization.
Was virtualization on those platforms even remotely like what VMWare ESXi, or Hyper-V is today? Full individual OSes separated from each other by a hypervisor? or where they more like containers today or is it docker? (I actually don't understand either of those technologies in the slightest). -
Has anyone used or set up a Ubiquiti USG? Are the lack of options worth it for the centralized management?
-
@Dashrender said:
hmm... OK I knew many SMBs who did have an AS400 - I have no idea if they used virtualization.
Did it say AS/400 on it? It was virtualized
All of those systems were. They probably only ran one VM as we often do today, but the virtualization was baked into the hardware it was always there. -
@Dashrender said:
Was virtualization on those platforms even remotely like what VMWare ESXi, or Hyper-V is today? Full individual OSes separated from each other by a hypervisor?
No, generally it was much more advanced. Doing virtualization in software is cheap and easy but can't do still all of the things that they could do back then.
-
My dad just found this...
http://www.msn.com/en-us/video/wonder/5-most-dangerous-volcanoes
So yeah, number two is Apoyeque just an hour from here to the north.
-
Just watched last nights South Park. I'm loving this season!!
-
Wife wants me to go to the store. I can hear the thunder coming. We need some rain, the humidity has been bad.
