Comments on: Sell CPU Cycles To CPU Share

By: Shaun

Shaun — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 06:40:19 +0000

looks like the service didnt fare so well…. :/

By: james michael dupont

james michael dupont — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 12:22:16 +0000

the site is gone!!

By: Jesse Kopelman

Jesse Kopelman — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 20:16:23 +0000

Since Sun sells there own Grid software and sells CPU cycles on their own Gird, I wouldn’t look to them to take the lead on fixing the hardware power.

By: sc

sc — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:05:18 +0000

While hardware costs are plummeting, most people overlook the fact that most of the IT costs are incurred in maintaining systems and keeping them updated with the latest patches, the right pipes etc. Also, they ignore the costs of maintaining a data-center or collocation.

Couple of things that will ensure that CPU Shares is successful are a good micropayment system for individuals willing to share out their desktops and a virtual machine.

By: John Powers

John Powers — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 18:33:46 +0000

The existing desktops and under-used servers already available in most companies and universities are a great place to start a grid project. Most of these machines run a single operating system (Hint — it’s not Linux, not OS/X…), are linked by a decent network, and are already powered all or most of the time. When expanding the computing power available to an application, the step from one processor to thousands is far more valuable than the step from thousands to millions.

By: Penguin

Penguin — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 18:24:07 +0000

i think more interesting is if enterprises can, in effect, create their own internal CPU “marketplace” (and why stop at CPU? storage and other assets may also apply). Companies have servers all over the place dedicated to specific tasks, and which are under-used or have extended times of low activity. A company creating an internal marketplace, or slushfund, of IT assets can immediately tap in and take advantage of idle gear.

By: Mashable* - Pete Cashmore on Web2.0 » CPUShare - Distributed Computing Marketplace

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:37:25 +0000

[...] [via Download Squad, Smartmobs and Om Malik] [...]

By: Om Malik

Om Malik — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:02:21 +0000

chauka…. here is the rub. the companies like Sun, intel and ibm are going to solve the power problem by building lower power chips and thuus th%re.

you can’t dig for oil when the prices go up but wait for more efficent engines from auto mmakers. same logic applies here as well.

By: tabgilbert

tabgilbert — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:00:32 +0000

I see my comment has already been made – electricity – there have been several articles about how the cost of power exceeds the cost of the hardware.

By: Luis Villa

Luis Villa — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:57:53 +0000

IDC (I think it was IDC, maybe one of the other big analyst firms) believes that desktop Linux actually has a bigger installed base than OS/X, so it isn’t *that* small. If they can’t convince a few hundred thousand linux geeks to install a new toy, they are hosed anyway…

By: chauka

chauka — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:08:44 +0000

Om,

You are forgetting one VERY important detail. You have a logic error in your suggestion that the probability of CPUshare falling is likely due to the ability for universities to build their own at a fraction of the cost in the 1990s. Where is your logic error? Power. Many lately (Google, McNealy, Intel, et al) are focusing on the cost of powering these grids, not merely the cost of computing. Its the electrical grid that could end up being the huge cost (and the electrical grid is NOT a one-time sunk cost unlike hardware)!

Tsk Tsk Mr. Malik!