Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

OT: Anyone want free $$ toward a new car?

Expand Messages
  • Evan Koblentz
    Mazda sent me a loyalty certificate. Actually they sent two: one is for $500 off certain models; the other is for $1,000 off different models. Any MARCHins
    Message 1 of 8 , Mar 26, 2008
      Message
      Mazda sent me a loyalty certificate.
       
      Actually they sent two: one is for $500 off certain models; the other is for $1,000 off different models.
       
      Any MARCHins want one?
       
      I'm happy to give them away, as long as they're for you / your spouse / child / etc. .... if you want 'em for a friend or otherwise, then I expect some reimbursement.
       
      Email me off-list.
    • Christian Liendo
      http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/technology/23digi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ____________________________________________________________________________________
      Message 2 of 8 , Mar 27, 2008
        http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/technology/23digi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin


        ____________________________________________________________________________________
        Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
        http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
      • B. Degnan
        Interesting. The IBM mainframes are modular now, they contain engineering to facilitate teams of individual servers working together. You can swap out
        Message 3 of 8 , Mar 27, 2008
          Interesting. The IBM "mainframes" are modular now, they contain
          engineering to facilitate teams of individual servers working
          together. You can swap out entire computing units (servers). I would like
          to have one for my business. After seeing a commercial for IBM, my son
          asked me "dad can I have an IBM blade center?"
          Bill

          At 04:36 AM 3/27/2008 -0700, you wrote:
          >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/technology/23digi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
          >
          >
          >
        • Dan Roganti
          The blade server technique has actually been around for much longer. This was a common design principle at many Telecom companies. At my last job with
          Message 4 of 8 , Mar 27, 2008


            The 'blade server' technique has actually been around for much longer. This was a common design principle at many Telecom companies. At my last job with Lucent/Bell Labs, I designed systems with this capability to support the telecom high availability requirement of 'five nines', which is at minimum 5.25min/year downtime. We had systems in service since the early 80's with this capability. There are many design issues which factor into creating a system to meet this requirement.

            =Dan
            [ Pittsburgh --- http://www2.applegate.org/~ragooman/           ]
            


            B. Degnan wrote:
            Interesting.  The IBM "mainframes" are modular now, they contain 
            engineering to facilitate teams of individual servers working 
            together.  You can swap out entire computing units (servers).  I would like 
            to have one for my business.  After seeing a commercial for IBM, my son 
            asked me "dad can I have an IBM blade center?"
            Bill
            
            At 04:36 AM 3/27/2008 -0700, you wrote:
              
            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/technology/23digi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
            
            
            
                
            
              
          • Bill Degnan
            ... From: John Allain Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 10:08 AM To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [midatlanticretro] Why old
            Message 5 of 8 , Mar 27, 2008

              From: "John Allain" <allain@...>
              Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 10:08 AM
              To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [midatlanticretro] Why old tech keeps kicking


              > After seeing a commercial for IBM, my son
              > asked me "dad can I have an IBM blade center?"

              What program were you watching?

              John A.


              These were commercials are on frequently, many programs/channels
            • John Allain
              ... What program were you watching? John A.
              Message 6 of 8 , Mar 27, 2008
                > After seeing a commercial for IBM, my son
                > asked me "dad can I have an IBM blade center?"

                What program were you watching?

                John A.
              • Sridhar Ayengar
                ... I wouldn t call the z10 old technology . That would be like calling a brand new nVidia graphics card old technology because it maintains compatibility
                Message 7 of 8 , Mar 27, 2008
                  Christian Liendo wrote:
                  > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/technology/23digi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

                  I wouldn't call the z10 "old technology". That would be like calling a
                  brand new nVidia graphics card "old technology" because it maintains
                  compatibility with the CGA. Incidentally, that picture of a warehouse
                  is less than 500 feet from where I'm sitting at the moment.

                  Also, when articles like that postulate that mainframes are now based on
                  microprocessors, they are (strictly speaking) correct, but they're still
                  missing the point. 1 mainframe processor != 1 microprocessor. There's
                  an array of microprocessors acting as a single mainframe processor. It
                  was the way the designers came up with of cost-effectively using
                  microprocessors to achieve the same resilience and reliability that was
                  expected from the track-record of previous mainframe processors. And
                  IBM isn't the first to use the idea of using multiple microprocessors to
                  create a single mainframe processor. Tandem (now HP NonStop, I guess)
                  has been doing it for a number of years.

                  BTW, I also wouldn't call the BladeCenter a "mainframe". Mainframes
                  have been modular for a number of years, but they aren't nearly as
                  modular as a BladeCenter. The thing that impresses me most about the
                  BladeCenter is that nowadays you can make a very dense IBM SP
                  supercomputer out of POWER6 blades and Myrinet or InfiniBand. That just
                  kicks ass.

                  Peace... Sridhar
                • schwepes@moog.netaxs.com
                  Actually, most new technology has been enhancements and not really new tech. The computer itself whether realized in switches as the English did or with
                  Message 8 of 8 , Mar 30, 2008
                    Actually, most "new" technology has been enhancements and not really new
                    tech.
                    The computer itself whether realized in switches as the English did or
                    with vacuum tubes as ENIAC in America represented a new technology.
                    The change from discrete elements to integrated chips represents new
                    tech as does the conceptual change that permitted both personal computers
                    and internet communications. All else are merely refinements within
                    a paradign. Granted that the speeds we take for granted were thought
                    impossible when we were so proud of our 8086's, but that change is
                    evolution and not revolution.
                    bs being a stickler for semantics.

                    On Thu, 27 Mar 2008, Sridhar Ayengar wrote:

                    > Christian Liendo wrote:
                    > > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/technology/23digi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
                    >
                    > I wouldn't call the z10 "old technology". That would be like calling a
                    > brand new nVidia graphics card "old technology" because it maintains
                    > compatibility with the CGA. Incidentally, that picture of a warehouse
                    > is less than 500 feet from where I'm sitting at the moment.
                    >
                    > Also, when articles like that postulate that mainframes are now based on
                    > microprocessors, they are (strictly speaking) correct, but they're still
                    > missing the point. 1 mainframe processor != 1 microprocessor. There's
                    > an array of microprocessors acting as a single mainframe processor. It
                    > was the way the designers came up with of cost-effectively using
                    > microprocessors to achieve the same resilience and reliability that was
                    > expected from the track-record of previous mainframe processors. And
                    > IBM isn't the first to use the idea of using multiple microprocessors to
                    > create a single mainframe processor. Tandem (now HP NonStop, I guess)
                    > has been doing it for a number of years.
                    >
                    > BTW, I also wouldn't call the BladeCenter a "mainframe". Mainframes
                    > have been modular for a number of years, but they aren't nearly as
                    > modular as a BladeCenter. The thing that impresses me most about the
                    > BladeCenter is that nowadays you can make a very dense IBM SP
                    > supercomputer out of POWER6 blades and Myrinet or InfiniBand. That just
                    > kicks ass.
                    >
                    > Peace... Sridhar
                    >
                    > ------------------------------------
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.