Jump to content

Article on Computing


Brian O'Hanlon
 Share

Recommended Posts

Brian, I take it your not a big fan of dell?? I don't mean to start any controversy.... but let me get this right, you're writing about an industry that changes every day, or I should say every minute it seams like the computer world is changing and upgrading.... but you site sources from 11 years ago?

 

What makes you say dell doesn't customize to the customer? Our IT guys just hit them up and customized 15 dual dualcore machines with 4 gigs of ram and dual 19" monitors, pretty much the same as what we bought from boxx only at half the price. Minus the video card, the systems are being bought to run revit, us 3d guys are sticking to the boxx.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is you make some good points in your writing but a bit of it just comes off as off the wall, and everyone's entitled to their own opinion..... but your article seems a but slanderous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you use the term mini-computing so vaguely that it really means nothing to me. it is just a phrase. from what i am gathering, you are implying that mini-computing is using a piece of hardware that is not very [powerful, maybe not much more than a screen and some type of way to input data. ..it then sends any functions it has to do to a mainframe, where the function only pulls as much computing power as it needs to complete that assignment.

 

i think you imply that the mainframes could even be government controlled. the government can control these supercomputer, and we can send data through them, pulling the power we need for our task.

 

our data would be shared via databases or some other mean by everyone that works for our company, or our user group. we could be a global thinking machine.

 

...basically, all of this sounds very idealistic, but i think the nature of people provides just as big of a hindrance as the companies who supply the machines that keep us from truly sharing information.

 

sure, you could take everyone's harddrive away, and force them to work from a shared desktop interface on a server where everyone has varying degrees of access to the same information, but will work? ....people like to have a sense of privacy and ownership. your locally global model of sharing information easily has the ramifications that Orwell outlined.

 

i see the advantages that your system could bring, but there is a huge risk that the working class looses all of its individuality, and becomes nothing but a cog in the machine, where every action they take can be monitored, and reacted upon. i believe we still need the hard drive, the local operating, and area of privacy that is protected and separated from everything else we do.

 

this is the area of computing that is designed to be an extension of your brain, holding unorganized ideas, or a collection of personal information that can not be data mined. i need only look at the patriot act, and how information is being mined and sifted through to realize the problems that come about in mining collected information.

 

that being said. there is a huge need for further integration of the information we have. this need is obvious on company levels, group levels, and public levels.

 

the concepts are being explored to varying degrees by companies like Microsoft, by companies like Autodesk, and yes, by companies like Sun.

 

take our industry for example. Revit and BIM in general is trying to be a product that works as a database, storing, and sharing all of the information of all levels on how a building is constructed to streamline and inform the building design process.

 

....did you happen to make it to Vismasters? ...several of the subjects dealt BIM and sharing of assets rather than hording assets.

 

i remember taking a CIS class in college. we were using a SUN setup in the class. i think it was running some version of Linux, then we launched Windows as a separate process within the Linux OS, and ran Windows in a window. ....but more importantly, the machines we were using were nothing but a monitor, keyboard, and a mouse. no tower standing next to us, everything was run off of a server located remotely in the building, and the computing power was shared. you only pulled what you needed.

 

granted our information wasn't necessarily shared, but the computing power was shared.

 

also, what about the various projects going on right now where you download a piece of software, and it allows your computer to connect to a server, where the server utilizes your computing power to help solve calculations when you are not using it.

 

i think the previous issue of wired, or at least a recent issues talked about the handful of supercomputers available that are shared between universities, and research institutions.

 

...but lets go back to the previous paragraph. look at the difference between file sharing networks like Napster compared to file sharing networks like Bittorrent. to completely different ways to share information. one makes computers act like a server and download model, the other incorporates your computer as a piece of the server.

 

so... maybe the answer is that we continue to buy individual PC's, but we work in a shared resource environment where the more computing power we bring to the table, the computer power we are allowed to pull off of the network when we need it. similar to how the Bittorrent network works in file sharing. the more information you allow to pass through your computer, the faster you can request information to be pulled into your computer.

 

anyway, i am sure i wondered several times on your topic, but could you please go into a little more detail about what you mean by....

 

Mini Computing.

_____________________

 

all of this said, i haven't listened to the link you posted. i will do that today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad to see, my article has provoked good comments anyhow.

 

Yeah, the point about being slanderous to Dell I can take. It was meant to attack the whole wintel solution actually, of which Dell I suppose is just the tip, but very visible part of an iceberg.

 

sure, you could take everyone's harddrive away, and force them to work from a shared desktop interface on a server where everyone has varying degrees of access to the same information, but will work?

 

True, there was a stage in networking, when the system admins took back control, and it has left a very sour taste in many peoples' mouth. But if you study some of the ideas expressed by David Weinberger, in his book, the Cluetrain manifesto, it might prove a useful way to learn about networks and people who build/use them.

 

http://www.cluetrain.com/book/index.html

 

Brian O' Hanlon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and area of privacy that is protected and separated from everything else we do.

 

this is one illusion i would hate to shatter, but privacy and computers in modern day world, don't exactly go hand in hand. See John Battelle's book about Search, for more details on it.

 

Or even Weinberger, in cluetrain hits quite hard against the notion of firewalls and locking things in. If you read weinberger's writing you will know what I mean.

 

B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, Mini-computing often adopted an approach to computing, pioneered by John McCarthy, who created the LISP programming language.

 

A simple way to learn and understand, about this McCarthy like computing, i by reading, What the Dormouse Said, by John Markoff. It is a remarkable account of early times in computing.

 

B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, just to give some idea what I am thinking about right now - there is a compilation of books here, in my blog response at adaptive path, web blog.

 

http://www.adaptivepath.com/blog/2006/08/09/matching-opportunity-and-execution-with-chris-conley/

 

You make an excellent point above, about BIM and stopping the hoarding of information. I could not agree more, from what I have seen in business myself on many, many projects. Sometimes, the same project is drawn 3-4 times separately, and in parallel, by 3-4 different offices all working on the same project.

 

Now, there is already a lot of duplication and wasted work done. But with CAD, there seems to be a whole new scope for abuse.

 

Brian O' Hanlon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...