🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1990Mar18.023523.4034@ultra.com> shj@ultra.com (Steve Jay) writes:
>brooks@maddog.llnl.gov (Eugene Brooks) writes:
...
>>Computers are best utilized as shared resources, your Killer Micros should
>>be many to a box and sitting in the computer room where the fan noise does
>>not drive you nuts.  This is where I keep MY Killer Micros.
...
>If someone measured the time that I spend using the stapler, tape
>dispenser, or pocket calculator that I have in my office, they'd
...
>Obviously, single user work stations are not yet so cheap as to be in
>the same category as staplers.  But, a $20,000 workstation dedicated
>to a > $100,000/year engineer or scientist doesn't seem that outrageous.
>The argument that an idle CPU is a wasted CPU becomes less and less
>convincing as the cost comes down.  An idle CPU that I can use when-
>ever I want, which is then 100% dedicated to me when I want it, could
>be the way to optimize MY time.  Improving people productivity is the
>name of the game, not improving computer utilization.
...
>Ultra Network Technologies / 101 Dagget Drive / San Jose, CA 95134 / USA

Your company, "home of the 1 gigabit network", is making computers easier
to share. Sharing computing resources on a network should not be equated
to the bad old days of timesharing.  The computing network can be
engineered to give 100% of the processing power a $100k scientist needs
to get the work done in the proper manner. When extra computing
resources are available (fellow $100k scientist stepped out to get a
coffee and jelly donut) they will get more than 100%.

Staplers and tape dispensers can't be pushed across a wire or fiber
so sharing is very inconvienent but computing power can.  In almost
all situations it doesn't matter that the application ran on a machine
or machines that are located 1 kilometer away instead of a machine
sitting close enough for you to kick.  The only pieces of equipment that
a computer user should be allowed to physically abuse are those that are
needed for interaction with the computing network: display, keyboard,
mouse;  essentially human I/O devices.  An X terminal fits the bill.
(Also, an X terminal will become obsolete at a slower rate than a
super-mini or killer micro;  a business argument that I will not develop
here)

I think this is more of a psychological issue than a technical
or business issue.  The attitudes that I encounter when I propose such
a sharing scheme can be summed as:
	"You mean that someone will be using *MY* workstation!"
My reply:
	"Calm down, you'll be using our computing network."

(There's also a case for mips envy: mine is -----er than yours.)

Finally, the cost argument doesn't negate the advantages of sharing,
it just makes sharing cheaper.

Note that SUN trumpets: ``The Network is the Computer.''
Note also that SUN is not offering X terminals like DEC, DG, MIPSco...
-- 
Bruce F. Wong		ATT Bell Laboratories
att!iexist!bwong	200 Park Plaza, Rm 1B-232
708-713-5111		Naperville, Ill 60566-7050