From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264692AbTIDDsE (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 23:48:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264694AbTIDDsD (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 23:48:03 -0400 Received: from e5.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.105]:32683 "EHLO e5.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264692AbTIDDsA (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 23:48:00 -0400 To: Larry McVoy cc: "Martin J. Bligh" , "Brown, Len" , Giuliano Pochini , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: Gerrit Huizenga From: Gerrit Huizenga Subject: Re: Scaling noise In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:02:27 PDT. <20030904030227.GJ5227@work.bitmover.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <9252.1062647164.1@us.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:46:04 -0700 Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:02:27 PDT, Larry McVoy wrote: > The problem with the old school approach of low/middle/high is that > everyone knows that they are shouldering far more than the material > costs plus a little profit when buying high end. They are paying for > the R&D. The market for those machines is very small and the volumes > never approach the level where the R&D is lost in the noise, that's a > significant fraction of the purchase price. That's OK as long as there > is no alternative but with all the household name companies like Google, > Amazon, Yahoo, etc demonstrating that racks of 1U boxes is a far better > answer the market for the big boxes is shrinking. Which is exactly what > Dell was saying. I dunno, maybe I'm completely confused but I see his > point. I don't see yours. Hmm. Did you check your data with respect to Amazon, Yahoo, etc.? Not saying I know anything different, but I think you didn't check before you made that statement. gerrit