The State of the Internet Operating System 74
macslocum writes "Tim O'Reilly: 'I've been talking for years about "the internet operating system," but I realized I've never written an extended post to define what I think it is, where it is going, and the choices we face. This is that missing post. Here you will see the underlying beliefs about the future that are guiding my publishing program as well as the rationale behind conferences I organize.'"
Re:Dumb terminals and smart people don't mix (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, it's all just one big cycle. When I first broke into the IT world, PCs were a bit of a novelty in most businesses. Then, the PC explosion caused things to move towards a "client-side" setup, with faster desktops, laptops and not as much horse power required on the server side. Then, in an effort to save money, tied in with servers/CPUs/memory becoming cheaper, and security concerns, companies started (or have started) to slowly pull things back from the client side and put more emphasis on the server side of things.
That said, I'm sure it won't be long before we go full-circle again.
One final thought, I do not want any "OS" that's supposed to run on my computer to be running on the internet. Corporate networks, in my experience, are typically much more prone to solid uptimes, unlike the internet. Plus, if something goes down on my network, I don't have to depend on someone else to fix it.
P or NP (Score:4, Insightful)
It seems the hardest and most time-consuming problem with Internet operating systems is figuring out how to work offline.
And the easiest solution, which seems to escape almost everybody, is "don't work online in the first place".
Re:Dumb terminals and smart people don't mix (Score:4, Insightful)
It's also dumb. Even if you bought a low-end Intel Atom machine, why would you want to waste that CPU letting it be a dumb terminal? Put that CPU to work by enabling it to do tasks independently even if the network connection fails.
I weep for OpenMOSIX. I was hoping that the project would continue and ere long we'd be motivated to buy all one architecture in our house simply because all the machines would form a cluster almost without our involvement and just accelerate each others' tasks. A terminal cluster where the terminals also make the entire system faster is kind of an ideal dream.
Re:Dumb terminals and smart people don't mix (Score:3, Insightful)
... but how often does slashdot go down these days?
Actually, that's a good way to phrase it. That is, it may be true that slashdot itself is almost always up and running. But from my viewpoint, out here on an internet "leaf" node, slashdot quite often seems to be "down". It's fairly common that when I do a refresh, it can take a minute or more to complete. Sometimes when the "Done" appears at the bottom left of the window, the window is mostly blank, and it takes another refresh to get the summaries back on the screen.
The basic problem with the cloud-computing model is the same as with the thin-client+server model and the terminal-cluster+mainframe model: Your computing is done on one or more remote machines, over which you have no control, and even when that's working, the results you see on your screen depends on a comm network. That network might work well when first installed with short links. But if it's successful, it'll quickly become overloaded and upgraded at team of managers and workers who mostly don't have a clue about how the technical details of the system.
The bean counters can explain all they like about how much cheaper centrally-controlled computing systems are. But if you actually want to get your work done, you'll once again discover that you need a computer that can do the work locally. If you don't have control over the machine, it won't do your work the way you want it done, and the people who do control it won't have a strong motive to help you with problems that they don't see or understand.
Re:Dumb terminals and smart people don't mix (Score:2, Insightful)
Every time there was a glitch in the network; every student, professor, and staff member at the university lost the ability to do anything on their computer--they couldn't so much as type a Word document.
Meh. That's true for my workplace despite our thick clients. Network folders, Internet connection, Active Directory... If anything goes down the office just sort of grinds to a halt.