<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Do we really need 10-GigE?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2004/07/26/do-we-really-need-10-gige/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2004/07/26/do-we-really-need-10-gige/</link>
	<description>Business, Internet, Technology &#38; Strategy</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:35:57 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris Garaffa</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2004/07/26/do-we-really-need-10-gige/#comment-3232</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Garaffa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2004/07/26/do-we-really-need-10-gige/#comment-3232</guid>
		<description>Papa Tony - You mean something like this: Xgrid? It's nowhere near complete yet, but it works. Additionally, XCode already has the ability to compile on multiple machines on the same network. We're almost there.
In general, I think saying we won't need to go to the next level (in this case, 10GE) because multiple current level (1GE) links are cheaper is only a valid excuse for so long. How many people said the same when the next level was 1GE and the current was 100...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Papa Tony - You mean something like this: Xgrid? It&#8217;s nowhere near complete yet, but it works. Additionally, XCode already has the ability to compile on multiple machines on the same network. We&#8217;re almost there.<br />
In general, I think saying we won&#8217;t need to go to the next level (in this case, 10GE) because multiple current level (1GE) links are cheaper is only a valid excuse for so long. How many people said the same when the next level was 1GE and the current was 100&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Papa Tony</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2004/07/26/do-we-really-need-10-gige/#comment-3233</link>
		<dc:creator>Papa Tony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2004/07/26/do-we-really-need-10-gige/#comment-3233</guid>
		<description>I can see an immediate need for even faster connections - Let's say that Apple comes out with clustering as a simple System Preference in the next operating-system (and it's very likely - The early version is in public beta right now).

Then, my architectural firm client with four G5's and three floors of Macs can create a single, 43-processor supercomputer that the guys in design can use to render a new building design, REALLY QUICKLY, even while others on the network are getting their daily work done.  Even the secretary's iMac at the front desk can pitch in.

The biggest bottleneck is the network bandwidth, so gimme more of that!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can see an immediate need for even faster connections - Let&#8217;s say that Apple comes out with clustering as a simple System Preference in the next operating-system (and it&#8217;s very likely - The early version is in public beta right now).</p>
<p>Then, my architectural firm client with four G5&#8217;s and three floors of Macs can create a single, 43-processor supercomputer that the guys in design can use to render a new building design, REALLY QUICKLY, even while others on the network are getting their daily work done.  Even the secretary&#8217;s iMac at the front desk can pitch in.</p>
<p>The biggest bottleneck is the network bandwidth, so gimme more of that!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
