Set up a computer cluster in your lab with just a few clicks, using Xgrid. At ADC read how scientists & mathematicians like Xgrid’s power and easy setup, which lets them focus on problem solving.
Xgrid: High Performance Computing for the Rest of Us
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I have said it before, and I will say it again – this is gold for universities. It might even convince some to make the switch.
It seems MacOSX has really opened up the mac to the techno-types and it is good to see apple encouraging this with innovative tools like this.
There’s already GridEngine (http://gridengine.sunsource.net/) supported on many platforms + more mature + open source. I don’t understand why Apple is announcing this as if they’re breaking some new ground.
For someone familiar with already existing systems, this isn’t really “gold”.
So, is it easy to set up? Cllick-n-go? Can a graphic designer set up a grid with several pcs?
I thing the innovation here is in the execution of the grid. Apple saw an opertunity to empower the schmo, like me, out there. Now small media companies can set up a grid without much hassles…
Oh yeah, it is gold… rendevousized gold…
“So, is it easy to set up? Cllick-n-go? Can a graphic designer set up a grid with several pcs? ”
Sure. Now, software to use the cluster for a graphics designer might be hard to come by.
“I thing the innovation here is in the execution of the grid. Apple saw an opertunity to empower the schmo, like me, out there. Now small media companies can set up a grid without much hassles…”
The software they use has to support it.
“Oh yeah, it is gold… rendevousized gold…”
Those with limited expectations are easily impressed.
This has been done before.
Yes, GridEngine is more advanced, and it supports many platforms, including supercomputers (NEC SX-6, Cray).
If Apple spends time on improving GridEngine by writing a nicer GUI for Mac, then users can take advantage of the robust SGE scheduling core + nice Apple user-friendly GUI.
Andrew
…is that it makes for DIY turnkey cluster deployment. All of the low level thunking of both deploying a cluster. All of the cluster configuration work, such as setting up rsh/rexec/ssh for remote execution (of MPI applications), configuring mpirun parameters, etc. is taken care of 100% automatically… users can simply plug in their XServe cluster nodes, point XGrid at their application, point and click to select nodes to use via Rendezvous, and their application is up and running on the cluster.
Here it takes me at least a few solid days of working to get a Linux cluster up and running (I’ve deployed three RAMS clusters here so far, and we’re about to purchase a fourth). There are many issues which require technical expertise, everything from configuring PXE/EtherBoot for diskless nodes or InterMezzo for nodes with disks, and then there’s the wonderful issue that Intel’s Fortran Compiler only supports a dead (or expensive) platform, RedHat. Deploying it on other distributions requires a lot of fine tuning by hand. Meanwhile IBM’s XL Fortran compiler for OS X is a simple point-and-click installation process.
For those who are looking at deploying a cluster with a low technical barrier of entry, XGrid is a godsend. Otherwise they’ll be looking at shelling out quite a bit of money for Dell’s (or otherwise) installation service.
“Sure. Now, software to use the cluster for a graphics designer might be hard to come by…The software they use has to support it.”
It’ll probably be a plug-in or handled completely through OS X.
“Those with limited expectations are easily impressed.
This has been done before.”
Where did they say it hasn’t been done before? Apple just made it simple. They didn’t announce this as if it were a new way to live or anything, they barely even made a noise about it…it’s an updated feature. That’s all.
“It’ll probably be a plug-in or handled completely through OS X. ”
That’s pretty unlikely, given the way applications like this work.
“Apple just made it simple.”
It was pretty simple before.
“That’s pretty unlikely, given the way applications like this work.”
Apple has a tendency to change how things work.
“It was pretty simple before.”
Ever used Rendezvous? Couldn’t get simpler than that.
>”That’s pretty unlikely, given the way applications like >this work.”
“Apple has a tendency to change how things work.”
Uh, no they don’t. Apple isn’t going to be able to modify someone else’s application for you.
>”It was pretty simple before.”
“Ever used Rendezvous? Couldn’t get simpler than that.”
Again, it was simple before. No, I haven’t used Rendezvous, as a Mac isn’t particularly useful to me (no real apps in my line of work and limited hardware support). I have, however, used Zeroconf (Rendezvous is an implementation of it).
“Uh, no they don’t. Apple isn’t going to be able to modify someone else’s application for you.”
Actually, they sort of can. A lot of things like this that are done in Mac applications are run through the operating system (QuickTime based apps are a great example). Changing they way the OS handles things changes the way the applications work. A small update adding grid support would be very simple and chances are most developers would jump at the chance.
“Again, it was simple before. No, I haven’t used Rendezvous, as a Mac isn’t particularly useful to me (no real apps in my line of work and limited hardware support). I have, however, used Zeroconf (Rendezvous is an implementation of it).”
If you’ve used Zeroconf then you have an idea of how simple it is. FCP’s zero configuration distributive rendering is an example of how easy they can make things. Plug it in and turn it on and you’re done, without needing to know a thing about any of it.
BTW, what line of work are you in?
“Actually, they sort of can. A lot of things like this that are done in Mac applications are run through the operating system (QuickTime”
This would require a bigger change then simply a change in a runtime library. NOt to mention most user applications will not benefit since those tasks are not embaressingly parallel.
“FCP’s zero configuration distributive rendering is an
example of how easy they can make things”
Again with a concept Apple didn’t invent or perfect. Application-specific network rendering has been available in the 3D regime for nearly a decade – and yes, it’s very easy.
“BTW, what line of work are you in?”
Engineering.
“This would require a bigger change then simply a change in a runtime library.”
Elaborate please. BTW, I wasn’t talking about runtime libraries.
“NOt to mention most user applications will not benefit since those tasks are not embaressingly parallel.”
Most people won’t be affected by this at all, which is probably why Apple isn’t making a big deal out of it.
“Again with a concept Apple didn’t invent or perfect. Application-specific network rendering has been available in the 3D regime for nearly a decade – and yes, it’s very easy.”
Who ever said anything about invention or perfection. All I said was they make things like this easy. You’re an engineer, of couse this stuff is easy for you. I’m a multimedia developer, so I’ve used this stuff before. But for someone taking the leap from iMovie or Director or something, this is a big step, and simple to someone like that means less than pointing and clicking.
“Elaborate please. BTW, I wasn’t talking about runtime libraries.”
What else do you think they can change? XGrid doesn’t decompile, parallelize, and recompile 3rd party apps. Applications have to be written for this.
“Who ever said anything about invention or perfection. All I said was they make things like this easy. You’re an”
Using the integrated network rendering functionality in something like 3DS Max is a matter of pointing and clicking already. For one’s own codes – well that isn’t going to be a matter of pointing and clicking, since you have to modify your code. “Cluster-in-a-box” kits have been available for some time.
“engineer, of couse this stuff is easy for you. I’m a multimedia developer, so I’ve used this stuff before. But for someone taking the leap from iMovie or Director or something, this is a big step, and simple to someone like that means less than pointing and clicking.”
This isn’t aimed at someone coming from the iMovie world. For a multimedia developer, distributed processing already exists and is plenty easy.
“What else do you think they can change? XGrid doesn’t decompile, parallelize, and recompile 3rd party apps. Applications have to be written for this.”
They don’t have to do all that, in the same since that OS X on a G5 allows 32 bit applications to address 8 gigs of ram.
“Using the integrated network rendering functionality in something like 3DS Max is a matter of pointing and clicking already”
Like I said, it could be easier. FCP can render using the unused cycles of all the computers on your network without you even knowing that it’s doing it. All you have to do it click a checkbox telling it that distributive rendering is on. No client side software needed.
“Using the integrated network rendering functionality in something like 3DS Max is a matter of pointing and clicking already”
If you write your own codecs than this is probably a non-issue anyway, as you will probably already have this sort of thing set up.
“This isn’t aimed at someone coming from the iMovie world. For a multimedia developer, distributed processing already exists and is plenty easy.”
But this is aimed at those people. Prosumers looking to go professional.
They are setting this up so there is not more point and click configuring, it can all be done without the user even knowing what’s going on. Set up a network and it’s done. Nobody has done that yet, and the only one’s who have an option really, other than Apple, are Sun and SGI.
“But this is aimed at those people. Prosumers looking to go professional.”
Which is why they tagged it High Performance Computing for the Rest of Us.
“They don’t have to do all that, in the same since that OS X on a G5 allows 32 bit applications to address 8 gigs of ram.”
What does that have to do with this? Besides, on OS X 32-bit applications can’t address 8 GB of RAM. Even so, that’s a function of the operating system. This really isn’t. Not without work on the app.
“Like I said, it could be easier. FCP can render using the unused cycles of all the computers on your network without you even knowing that it’s doing it. All you have to do it click a checkbox telling it that distributive rendering is on. No client side software needed. ”
Most of the 3D distributed packages require client-side software, since the app is very large, but I can’t see how this could be easier without it reading your mind.
“If you write your own codecs than this is probably a non-issue anyway, as you will probably already have this sort of thing set up. ”
I’m not sure what you’re talking about here. What do codecs have to do with this?
“But this is aimed at those people. Prosumers looking to go professional.”
“Prosumers” don’t run BLAST.
“They are setting this up so there is not more point and click configuring, it can all be done without the user even knowing what’s going on. Set up a network and it’s done. Nobody has done that yet, and the only one’s who have an option really, other than Apple, are Sun and SGI.”
You’re right. No one has built a distributed processing system designed for people who have no idea what’s going on: Apple’s target market.
<couldn’t resist>
“High Performance Computing for the Rest of Us”
That was the Beowulf cluster concept nearly 10 years ago. Frankly, the “rest of us” don’t require HPC.
Apple *isn’t* the computer for the “rest of us”. That’s clear from their marketing, if anything.
im sorry, but FCP does no such thing…
i think you have seen “background rendering” and read something between the lines that wasnt really there…
there is no client side app because there is no server..
background rendering in FCP refers to background on your machine (meaning.. doesnt bring a a big progress bar that stops you from doing anything else like it did in FCP3 and below)
whilst background rendering would be kind of cool, most of the compositing operations in FCP are IO heavy and relatively processor cheap. unless you had some very fast interconnects between you main machine and your slaves most of the time moving your footage across the network would take longer than just doing the process locally
JCS, you’re being close-minded about XGrid, without even using it. What kind of engineer shits on things without conducting a few tests? Porta Potty designer, perhaps?
Can you *at least* list the pros of GridEngine instead of bashing stuff you’ve _never_ used?
You’re right. No one has built a distributed processing system designed for people who have no idea what’s going on: Apple’s target market.
<couldn’t resist>
It could be funny, but in the end, it only sounds trollish. UNIX is UNIX. To think Macs aren’t particularly useful for parallel computing is to say UNIX isn’t either. Apple’s markets have a lot more doors open these days, so you’re just going to have to include them when you think “mac user base”. Plenty of them are engineers just like “you”.
As for the traditional user base: Sure, a lot of the apps will need rewriting, but the fact that Apple has even introduced grid computing to other markets means they *will* be supported, sooner or later. It’s a first, big step. I mean, what the hell do you prefer, what’s your point? That they never should have introduced it to others? Then we’d be stuck in the present. Yeah, great solution, buddy.
“JCS, you’re being close-minded about XGrid, without even using it. What kind of engineer shits on things without conducting a few tests? Porta Potty designer, perhaps?”
Most engineers do not believe marketing.
“Can you *at least* list the pros of GridEngine instead of bashing stuff you’ve _never_ used? ”
I wasn’t the one who brought up GridEngine. That wasn’t particularly new, either.
“UNIX is UNIX.”
Mac OS X isn’t UNIX.
“Plenty of them are engineers just like “you”.”
Not if they need the professional-grade tools available elsewhere that have never been so on the Mac.
“even introduced grid computing to other markets”
Content creation markets have already had this for quite some time.
“That they never should have introduced it to others? Then we’d be stuck in the present. Yeah, great solution, buddy.”
My POINT is that this isn’t anything new. Other markets ALREADY make use of it. First “big step” to what, exactly – when that ground has already been tread? I know most Mac fans believe that everything Apple does is new and innovative and all that – but it isn’t.
Ok, I will try to state this in a non-flaming way.
JCS, like every engineer I have ever had the pleasure or displeasure working with, you have the same attitude. You fail to realize that the machines are not here to give you something to do, they are here to solve problems.
That is it, nothing more. The less I have to do to manage a problem and solve the issue, the better.
That is the concept behind what Apple is attempting to do with Xgrid. Xgrid makes it possible for an organization to step into grid computing WITHOUT having additional engineers on staff. If the current/previous solutions are great would not more common people (read: non-engineers) be using home built grids to solve their computing tasks?
A simple example:
I have a large financial model that would normally require 1 machine 20 hours to solve.
solution #1:
Pay an additional 3 hardware/software engineers to configure, troubleshoot, program & setup the process on a grid.
or…
solution #2:
Use Xgrid, pay 1 software engineer to create the parallel software needed to solve the financial model and I am done with it. No special support, no extra troubleshooting, configuration, etc…
Guess what? I am in business to make money, not let some engineer have his/her way with my hardware & software resources. Engineers are expensive, the costs are repeated every year. They have personalities and get sick. They have bad days.
Here is something else for you. The premium in the price of equipment is irrelevant if the solution works trouble free. The fact that Apple puts Aqua on top of a BSD core & Mach kernel does not bother me in the least. I DON’T CARE. I will use whatever technology provides me with the simplest solution that solves my problem NOW. If something new and better comes out from Novell/SUSE or Sun or IBM or whatever, I will toss the current crap out and replace it with the new junk that will make me more money.
But, I do sympathize with you on this, I am 37 and started my computing tenure on a DEC teletype machine connected via 110 baud to a mini-computer(pain in the ass to troubleshoot when something went wrong, but when you are 12, that is a challenge.) From there it went to TRS-80’s, Apple IIs (an Apple III+), IBM PCs, Macs, etc… So fiddling around with techie stuff is fun to me.
-Fuji
JCS, first of all, where are you getting this stuff about me or anyone else calling this new? You keep bringing that up but no one said it was. No one called browsing a new concept when Apple introduced Safari. But you probably think Safari is just another version of Konqueror. Grid computing is going to move to ordinary users. Apple has always tried to bring things that used to be hard to ordinary people. A mouse, no that will never be useful. Nor will plug and play. FireWire? Who needs that. 32 bit computing? What’s the point. 64 bit? Now that’s just too much power for most people. Home movie making? No one will want to do that. Downloading music? What’s the point? With the exception of FireWire, they didn’t invent any of that. No one is saying they did. But they made it easy and put it to use with normal people. They are going for the same thing with grid computing.
As for engineers not believing in marketing, well, that’s just absurd. Why make something, or improve something, as the case may be, and not try and make some money off of it?
“What does that have to do with this? Besides, on OS X 32-bit applications can’t address 8 GB of RAM. Even so, that’s a function of the operating system. This really isn’t. Not without work on the app.”
It was an example of how reworking an OS can change how an application works, and yes, the 32 bit apps can address 8 gigs of ram. The applications don’t handle that part, the OS does.
“Most of the 3D distributed packages require client-side software, since the app is very large, but I can’t see how this could be easier without it reading your mind.”
Did you stop to think that grid computing has other uses than 3D rendering? The simple fact that you have to install something on another computer to make it work makes it harder than what a lot of people will want to work with. The idea here is having a few computers around the house that work together.
“I’m not sure what you’re talking about here. What do codecs have to do with this?”
Then why did you bring it up?
“”Prosumers” don’t run BLAST.”
Think of other uses. Try being creative.
“You’re right. No one has built a distributed processing system designed for people who have no idea what’s going on: Apple’s target market.
<couldn’t resist>”
No need to be rude, we could go on insulting userbases all day…Linux users don’t understand the power of commercial software and a well designed platform, Windows users play games all day…blah blah blah.
“That was the Beowulf cluster concept nearly 10 years ago. Frankly, the “rest of us” don’t require HPC.”
What’s your deal with things being new? Noday said this was. What, is Apple not allowed to do anything unless they do it first? Maybe they should just stop making software all together. Or no more keyboards.
“Apple *isn’t* the computer for the “rest of us”. That’s clear from their marketing, if anything.”
Got an easier way to get powerful things done? I’d love to hear it.
Alex, I know what backround rendering is. That’s not what I am talking about.
“Mac OS X isn’t UNIX.”
They just haven’t bothered to get certified. Linux isn’t technically unix either.
“Not if they need the professional-grade tools available elsewhere that have never been so on the Mac.”
The times they are a-changin’.
“Content creation markets have already had this for quite some time.”
Again, think of new uses.
“My POINT is that this isn’t anything new. Other markets ALREADY make use of it. First “big step” to what, exactly – when that ground has already been tread? I know most Mac fans believe that everything Apple does is new and innovative and all that – but it isn’t.”
Why do you keep coming back to this ‘new’ thing. No one called it new. Get over it already.
Firstly, shame on the people who turn everything into a Mac vs PC debate. Everyone’s different, get over it.
Secondly READ THE XGRID DOCUMENTATION, many of you are making fools out of yourselves.
Apple have been extremely quiet about XGrid, so I don’t know why people are saying things like “I don’t know why Apple are making such a big deal out of this”. They’re not, so why are you?
Finally, I don’t know (and don’t care) who said it but “prosumers don’t run BLAST”. You’re kidding right?
Matt
Forgot to add, surely the title “High performance computing for the rest of us” would give you a clue that Apple aren’t claiming this is new.
Once again, Apple are making hardly any noise about this.
Matt
You’re right. No one has built a distributed processing system designed for people who have no idea what’s going on: Apple’s target market.
<couldn’t resist>
I agree wholeheartedly with JCS on this. Grid computing is serious business. Any company/school/business which needs it would also be willing to take the investment to install and fine tune a serious grid solution. Such time/staff investment is not extraordinary. All such organizations already employ IT staff who could take care of it a matter of days.
Apple has no place in the server arena either where functionality and reliability are main issues. Grid business as well as the server business are full of technically very impressive and mature solutions. Anyone who thinks Apple could have something to offer in this arena by making good looking interfaces (all of which functionally are ugly to the bone) is either too ignorant or affected by some sort of zealotry.
Apple has no place in the server arena either where functionality and reliability are main issues.>>
So, do XServes have reliablity issues?
Because an OS as easy to use and as bulletproof as OS X is certainly what I call functional.
>>> It was an example of how reworking an OS can change how an application works, and yes, the 32 bit apps can address 8 gigs of ram. The applications don’t handle that part, the OS does.
<<<
Dude, I dont know how much experience you’ve had parallellizing programs, but the limiting factors are really things like efficiency and time. The 32-bit & OS factors aside, the situation is no different on *any* platform that can be used for this purpose. So ultimately its upto the end-user to parallellize their stuff and make sure it runs efficiently on your grid … which is why the parent poster was asking you what it had to do with anything.
———
The ease of configuration, of course, is the coolest thing about XGrid, as Linux-based cluster take much longer to get going and this is what separates it from the pack.
The screenshot of the “GHz meter” is somewhat misleading since these machines are connected over fast/gigabit ethernet, which is the slowest way of communication among all the technologies used in clusters. So any your effective CPU power is killed by the sheer amount of time it takes for sending messages between these machines.
XGrid is a nice system, but trying to smack talk it as the best thing ever for grid computing is totally laughable. Linux boxes require a bit more set-up, but then again, the price
I’d also point out that this looks pretty much the same as Condor.
-Erwos
all that is needed is for the process scheduler in the OS to be aware of the other computer on the network and when there is a process that can run on a cycle across the network it can send it there.
the apps don’t have to know about the distributed networking.
that is what Panther PPC was talking about when he mentioned how apps do not need to be aware of memory to take advantage of it.
if it is hardware. the OS can manage it and the apps can be blissfully unaware.
so mr. engineer…you are wrong about the app needed to know anything about the distributed processing…does that mean that all apps can take advantage of it? no, because some operations are not parallel, but if there is an operation that can take place out of order (a lot of apps have a few here and there ) then the ability to do so it built in.
That has got to be the single most ignorant comment I have ever read on these boards….of course apple has a business getting into any market they like.
and their Xserves are great machines…..you think they are not capable of handling Grid computing…LOOK TO VIRGINIA TECH FOOL…
Nobody’s smacktalking non-Apple solutions, or being Pro-Apple here. At least I don’t think it’s about that.
It’s just defending XGrid from misconceptions about the Mac platform– not saying it’s better or anything — Because it _isn’t_. It’s also about promoting the idea that grid computing can be taken into new areas as well.
Apple has no place in the server arena either where functionality and reliability are main issues. Grid business as well as the server business are full of technically very impressive and mature solutions. Anyone who thinks Apple could have something to offer in this arena by making good looking interfaces (all of which functionally are ugly to the bone) is either too ignorant or affected by some sort of zealotry.
Hmm…So grid computing has no place other than areas where they constantly have to be maintained — “Where functionality and reliability” are the main issues. Yet many are choosing Apple’s solution because it’s less of a hassle — and yet, it’s ugly to the bone?
Oookay..
Besides, grid computing is just the next step in networking — another thing the eggheads thought users, content creators, and lone developers had no use for. I mean, I’m thankful it wasn’t you who created the IP stack, else I couldn’t even type this back to you. In the “industry” I work in (music), I know I as sure as hell could use it, and use it plenty — probably more than most engineers, if given the chance, I bet. It’s no different than Raid, Networking, Wireless, even 3D cards, etc..Standard technologies that wouldn’t be here for me if decisions were left up to the reasoning like you’ve given.
many homes are multi computer now…a home with more than one Mac can easily take advantage of this in the next version of iMovie and iDVD after the wide distribution of built in Xgrid.
a distributed iMovie will bring the power of distributed computing to home users…and while you will not see great speed increases on small projects….the power is there for large ones…not to mention independent photographers who do all their own development in house and have a staff of one (themself) will have a great time with this if Adobe is smart and make photoshop more parallel than it already is…do you know how long a 100 MB Tiff file takes to render?
apple already uses distcc and zeroconf for distributed compiling…think about that applied to any app that wants to use distributed computing as a service from the OS…it has to be there to be used.
Do I understand you correctly that you want grid computing to stay reserved for IT engineers only or must be done only under their supervision ?
That wasnt my post at all! My post was at:
http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=6539&offset=15&rows=30#21…
Oh well … slashdotters I suppose … cant be expected to actually read anything before posting!
JCS: you’re right, they’re wrong. I just want you to know at least one person can realize the truth.
-Erwos
Would anyone like a glass of Opinion?
I love fine wines, especially the really old opinions.
Matt
>the apps don’t have to know about the distributed networking.
Hmm are you joking or what ?
Do you know how people use clusters for scientific calculations for example ?
You SHOULD have software modified to take advantages of
parallel computation. If anybody here tried to invert
huge matrix for example he knows that the best way
is to split this task on smaller ones which can be run
at parallel on different nodes.If you will use
simple plain method you will finish using just one processor.
Oh well … slashdotters I suppose … cant be expected to actually read anything before posting!
Whoa…I apologize: Sorry, man. But I don’t even visit that website, but if “slashdotter” is an insult, there’s no reason to insult me for a simple mistake. It happens, you know..
But I don’t even visit that website, but if “slashdotter” is an insult
Damn, I’m going to have to apologize again for the use of two “Buts”. =D
“JCS, like every engineer I have ever had the pleasure or displeasure working with, you have the same attitude.
You fail to realize that the machines are not here to give you something to do, they are here to solve problems.”
That’s appropos of nothing. I most certainly view a computer as a tool – I just view the Mac as not a superior tool.
“That is the concept behind what Apple is attempting to do with Xgrid. Xgrid makes it possible for an organization to step into
grid computing WITHOUT having additional engineers on staff. If the current/previous solutions are great would not more common people (
read: non-engineers) be using home built grids to solve their computing tasks? ”
What embaressingly parallel task would that be?
“A simple example:
I have a large financial model that would normally require 1 machine 20 hours to solve.
solution #1:
Pay an additional 3 hardware/software engineers to configure, troubleshoot, program & setup the process on a grid.
or…
solution #2:
Use Xgrid, pay 1 software engineer to create the parallel software needed to solve the financial model and I am done with it.
No special support, no extra troubleshooting, configuration, etc… ”
What makes you think it’d only require one programmer if you use the XGrid API over something older and better supported like MPI?
What extra hardware do you think is required for a Network of Workstations not running XGrid? Nothing.
“Guess what? I am in business to make money, not let some engineer have his/her way with my hardware & software resources.
Engineers are expensive, the costs are repeated every year. They have personalities and get sick. They have bad days.”
Guess what: you don’t really understand what this package does.
“Here is something else for you. The premium in the price of equipment is irrelevant if the solution works trouble free.
The fact that Apple puts Aqua on top of a BSD core & Mach kernel does not bother me in the least. I DON’T CARE.”
Apple’s solutions are NOT trouble free.
“JCS, first of all, where are you getting this stuff about me or anyone else calling this new?
You keep bringing that up but no one said it was. No one called browsing a new concept when
Apple introduced Safari. But you probably think Safari is just another version of Konqueror.
Grid computing is going to move to ordinary users. Apple has always tried to bring things
that used to be hard to ordinary people. A mouse, no that will never be useful. Nor will plug and”
Network computing ALREADY HAS.
“They are going for the same thing with grid computing.”
Nope.
“As for engineers not believing in marketing, well, that’s just absurd. Why make something, or
improve something, as the case may be, and not try and make some money off of it? ”
I said engineers don’t believe marketing. That’s not absurd – that’s just ignoring the hype.
“It was an example of how reworking an OS can change how an application works, and yes, the 32 bit
apps can address 8 gigs of ram. The applications don’t handle that part, the OS does.”
No, they can’t. Not on OS X. OS X is not a 64-bit OS.
“Did you stop to think that grid computing has other uses than 3D rendering?
The simple fact that you have to install something on another computer to make it work makes it
harder than what a lot of people will want to work with. The idea here is having a few computers around the house that work together.”
There are very few embaressingly parallel tasks that the “average Joe” will need to be able to do.
>”I’m not sure what you’re talking about here. What do codecs have to do with this?”
“Then why did you bring it up?”
I didn’t. I brought up CODES. The kind of thing XGrid is designed for – not iMovie.
>”That was the Beowulf cluster concept nearly 10 years ago. Frankly, the “rest of us” don’t require HPC.”
What’s your deal with things being new? Noday said this was. What, is Apple not allowed to do anything unless
they do it first? Maybe they should just stop making software all together. Or no more keyboards. ”
The constant crowing about the Next Big Thing from Apple Superior To All Others from the Mac advocate community is annoying.
“Got an easier way to get powerful things done? I’d love to hear it.”
Sure I do. What do you need to do?
>”Not if they need the professional-grade tools available elsewhere that have never been so on the Mac.”
“The times they are a-changin’.”
Unlikely.
“Finally, I don’t know (and don’t care) who said it but “prosumers don’t run BLAST”. You’re kidding right? ”
No, I’m not. You do know what “prosumer” means, right?
“that is what Panther PPC was talking about when he mentioned how apps do not need to be aware of memory to take advantage of it.
if it is hardware. the OS can manage it and the apps can be blissfully unaware.”
That would involve something like IRIX, not Mac OS X.
“so mr. engineer…you are wrong about the app needed to know anything about the distributed processing…does that mean that all apps can take advantage of it? no, because some operations are not parallel, but if there is an operation that can take place out of order (a lot of apps have a few here and there ) then the ability to do so it built in.”
XGrid doesn’t work as a process migration facility in that manner. You do know there’s an attached SDK, right?
XGrid doesn’t do this, mr mac advocate.
“Do I understand you correctly that you want grid computing to stay reserved for IT engineers only or must be done only under their supervision ?”
What’s an “IT engineer”? Regardless, my point was that this is already available for not IT people. It is already easy. What Apple did is produce an implementation of BEEP (http://www.beepcore.org) and put a GUI on it. Apple did not invent the simple NOW (network of workstations). If anyone did, it was Sun. APIs like XGrid’s have been available for a very long time. It does not automagically make your code a parallel code. It does not automagically speed up iMovie.
“You SHOULD have software modified to take advantages of
parallel computation. If anybody here tried to invert
huge matrix for example he knows that the best way
is to split this task on smaller ones which can be run
at parallel on different nodes.If you will use
simple plain method you will finish using just one processor.”
Just like you would want 64 bit applications on a 64 bit computer, but there’s always a transition period.
“I just view the Mac as not a superior tool.”
That really, really depends on what you are doing. Nothing can touch a Mac for a lot of things.
“What embaressingly parallel task would that be?”
What if you build a home audio studio with a few Macs (one of the many things they are superior tools for). Not many musicians know much about grid computing, but the need for the power is there.
“What makes you think it’d only require one programmer if you use the XGrid API over something older and better supported like MPI?”
I’d agree that it would take more than one person for the time being, as anything remotely professional rarely takes only one person. But for an up and coming business starting fresh, it’s an either/or situation and for small to medium businesses the Apple solution is very appealing.
“What extra hardware do you think is required for a Network of Workstations not running XGrid? Nothing.”
Just as it wouldn’t cost anything extra for a company that already has Macs to use XGrid.
“Apple’s solutions are NOT trouble free.”
Nothing is trouble free, but what are you basing that on and/or comparing it to? It’s a lot less trouble than Windows and Linux.
It seems like what you are trying to say is that Macs just should not have the ability to do this stuff. No, it’s not a new concept, but no one said it was. It’s just another feature they are adding, which will most likely find its way into future OS X releases in many other forms.
“Just like you would want 64 bit applications on a 64 bit computer, but there’s always a transition period”
Actually, there are good reasons you might not, since in some situations a 64-bit binary is slower than a 32-bit one of the same code.
“That really, really depends on what you are doing. Nothing can touch a Mac for a lot of things. ”
Which would be *what*, exactly?
“What if you build a home audio studio with a few Macs (one of the many things they are superior tools for). Not”
Inertia, more than anything.
“many musicians know much about grid computing, but the need for the power is there. ”
Again, why do you think this is an embaressingly parallel task? This isn’t magic – there are many tasks that do not benefit.
“Just as it wouldn’t cost anything extra for a company that already has Macs to use XGrid. ”
I doubt that’s what he meant, but anyway – there aren’t many companies that have large number of Macs.
“Nothing is trouble free, but what are you basing that on and/or comparing it to? It’s a lot less trouble than Windows and Linux. ”
I rather doubt that.
“It seems like what you are trying to say is that Macs just should not have the ability to do this stuff. No, it’s not a new concept, but no one said it was. It’s just another feature they are adding, which will most likely find its way into future OS X releases in many other forms.”
What I’m saying is that Apple didn’t make it easy just now – it already was. Macs are NOT better at this stuff then other platforms, however. There is an annoying tendency on the Mac advocate side to paint every product from Apple as either new or best of breed – without even looking at the product – just because it’s from Apple.
They also have a tendency to believe marketing hype – from Apple. Are all Apple users like this? Certainly not. Are the advocates? Yes.
“Like I said, it could be easier. FCP can render using the unused cycles of all the computers on your network without you even knowing that it’s doing it. All you have to do it click a checkbox telling it that distributive rendering is on. No client side software needed. ”
“Alex, I know what backround rendering is. That’s not what I am talking about. ”
then what are you talking about dude… because the above statement is utter nonsense ..
if you can enlighten us with a link to the contrary i would be very appreciative ..
“Like I said, it could be easier. FCP can render using the unused cycles of all the computers on your network without you even knowing that it’s doing it. All you have to do it click a checkbox telling it that distributive rendering is on. No client side software needed. ”
Generally, programs that require client side installations do so due to the size of the program. 3DS Max, for instance, requires a network install of the program and all plugins on each node machine. This saves a *tremendous amount* of network bandwidth. The only thing you have to send to each node is a copy of the scene and all texture maps. This is, after all, a bunch of desktop machines – not an Origin cluster connected with CrayLink.
“Network computing ALREADY HAS.”
Really? Where? I’ve only seen it in pro apps.
“Nope.”
Good comeback. Since you are obviously pay so much attention to their strategy you must know better than anyone else. Lol.
“I said engineers don’t believe marketing. That’s not absurd – that’s just ignoring the hype.”
Without marketing, how do you expect to get the word out about new products? Not everyone is addicted to the net.
“No, they can’t. Not on OS X. OS X is not a 64-bit OS.”
OS X is a 32 bit OS with 64 bit addressing. Do your research.
“There are very few embaressingly parallel tasks that the “average Joe” will need to be able to do.”
Right now, no, there aren’t. But there will be. It’s an evolving industry.
“I didn’t. I brought up CODES. The kind of thing XGrid is designed for – not iMovie.”
Sorry, misread. XGrid is designed to be implented into apps like iMovie in the future. iMovie would be a great use for it.
“The constant crowing about the Next Big Thing from Apple Superior To All Others from the Mac advocate community is annoying.”
No one in this thread is crowing. Apple added a new feature to their arsenal (not new to the world, but not yet done by Apple), and we applauded them for it. I would’ve done the same had it been anyone else.
“Sure I do. What do you need to do?”
I’m a multimedia developer. Point me to a better platform for that.
“Unlikely.”
It’s always changing.
“That would involve something like IRIX, not Mac OS X.”
Why would that not be possible on OS X? It’s been a long time since you’ve taken a good look at a Mac, huh?
“What’s an “IT engineer”? Regardless, my point was that this is already available for not IT people. It is already easy. What Apple did is produce an implementation of BEEP (http://www.beepcore.org) and put a GUI on it.”
And again, I suppose you think Safari is Konqueror with a new look, too, right?
Apple did not invent the simple NOW (network of workstations). If anyone did, it was Sun. APIs like XGrid’s have been available for a very long time.”
No one said they invented it, where are you hearing that?
“It does not automagically make your code a parallel code. It does not automagically speed up iMovie.”
No, but an OS update would take care of it.
“Actually, there are good reasons you might not, since in some situations a 64-bit binary is slower than a 32-bit one of the same code.”
Now you are just nit-picking.
“Which would be *what*, exactly?”
Most all media development. Windows only dominates the office market.
“Inertia, more than anything.”
Huh?
“Again, why do you think this is an embaressingly parallel task? This isn’t magic – there are many tasks that do not benefit.”
As grid computing exists now, there are many tasks that don’t benefit. Things are always evolving though.
“I doubt that’s what he meant, but anyway – there aren’t many companies that have large number of Macs.”
Pretty much all multimedia houses (XServe was introduced for video pros). Print and prepress companies. Audio studios. I can name quite a few companies off the top of my head that use mostly Macs.
“I rather doubt that.”
Basing that on what? Using the word doubt makes it sound as if you don’t know much about Macs. They aren’t what they were in the 90s.
“What I’m saying is that Apple didn’t make it easy just now – it already was.”
Then why aren’t new uses being thought up for it?
“Macs are NOT better at this stuff then other platforms, however.”
No one said they were.
” There is an annoying tendency on the Mac advocate side to paint every product from Apple as either new or best of breed – without even looking at the product – just because it’s from Apple.”
No one has done that here.
“They also have a tendency to believe marketing hype – from Apple. Are all Apple users like this? Certainly not. Are the advocates? Yes.”
You haven’t done anything to prove wrong anything in this article. Show me where they are lieing about something?
Alex, I’ll find the link tonight and post it for you.
“Generally, programs that require client side installations do so due to the size of the program. 3DS Max, for instance, requires a network install of the program and all plugins on each node machine. This saves a *tremendous amount* of network bandwidth. The only thing you have to send to each node is a copy of the scene and all texture maps. This is, after all, a bunch of desktop machines – not an Origin cluster connected with CrayLink.”
Apple pulls it off by having the client software built into QuickTime. It’s standard on all OS X installs, so there is no need to configure things later. And advantage of controlling hardware and software.
dude, see these math guys in the article had a bunch of macs, so they set up a grid and now use all those macs to speed up their work.
It’s a good thing. It’s really that simple.
“dude, see these math guys in the article had a bunch of macs, so they set up a grid and now use all those macs to speed up their work.
It’s a good thing. It’s really that simple.”
My point was that it was simple before. Apple didn’t *make* it simple.
“My point was that it was simple before. Apple didn’t *make* it simple.”
Then show me where it’s simpler than putting 2 computers on a network and it working.
>”Network computing ALREADY HAS.”
“Really? Where? I’ve only seen it in pro apps.”
Non-pro apps haven’t really needed the capability. The APIs – including the one Apple built XGrid on
have been availabl
“Nope.”
>”I said engineers don’t believe marketing. That’s not absurd – that’s just ignoring the hype.”
“Without marketing, how do you expect to get the word out about new products? Not everyone is addicted to the net.”
Oh come on – not believing marketing is not buying into HYPE.
>”No, they can’t. Not on OS X. OS X is not a 64-bit OS.”
“OS X is a 32 bit OS with 64 bit addressing. Do your research.”
No, it isn’t. Do yours.
>”There are very few embaressingly parallel tasks that the “average Joe” will need to be able to do.”
“Right now, no, there aren’t. But there will be. It’s an evolving industry.”
Again, unlikely.
>”I didn’t. I brought up CODES. The kind of thing XGrid is designed for – not iMovie.”
“Sorry, misread. XGrid is designed to be implented into apps like iMovie in the future. iMovie would be a great use for it. ”
iMovie isn’t an embaressingly parallel task, so no.
>”The constant crowing about the Next Big Thing from Apple Superior To All Others from the Mac advocate community is annoying.”
“No one in this thread is crowing. Apple added a new feature to their arsenal (not new to the world, but not yet done by Apple),”
Certainly looks like it.
>”Sure I do. What do you need to do?”
“I’m a multimedia developer. Point me to a better platform for that.”
These days, Windows XP. A few years ago – IRIX.
>”Unlikely.”
“It’s always changing.”
There are trends that become apparent in a maturing industry.
>”That would involve something like IRIX, not Mac OS X.”
“Why would that not be possible on OS X? It’s been a long time since you’ve taken a good look at a Mac, huh?”
And you’ve never looked at IRIX. They aren’t in the same class.
>”What’s an “IT engineer”? Regardless, my point was that this is already available for not IT people.
>It is already easy. What Apple did is produce an implementation of BEEP (http://www.beepcore.org) and put a GUI on it.”
“And again, I suppose you think Safari is Konqueror with a new look, too, right?”
Pretty much – it is.
“No one said they invented it, where are you hearing that?”
The “finally HPC for the masses” stuff.
>”It does not automagically make your code a parallel code. It does not automagically speed up iMovie.”
“No, but an OS update would take care of it.”
An OS update isn’t going to automagically parallelize your code either.
>”Actually, there are good reasons you might not, since in some situations a 64-bit binary is slower than a 32-bit one of the same code.”
“Now you are just nit-picking.”
Just speaking from experience.
>”Which would be *what*, exactly?”
“Most all media development. Windows only dominates the office market.”
Inertia. Windows also dominates 3D animation and engineering – and at least half of the copies of Photoshop sold.
>”Inertia, more than anything.”
“Huh?”
You started on a Mac, right? It’s what you know. There is no technical superiority for those tasks on the Mac and the software is the same-
baring, of course, the packages that Apple buys and then cancels the PC port.
>”Again, why do you think this is an embaressingly parallel task? This isn’t magic – there are many tasks that do not benefit.”
“As grid computing exists now, there are many tasks that don’t benefit. Things are always evolving though. ”
You don’t understand – there are some operations that WILL NOT BENEFIT.
>”I doubt that’s what he meant, but anyway – there aren’t many companies that have large number of Macs.”
“Pretty much all multimedia houses (XServe was introduced for video pros). Print and prepress companies.
Audio studios. I can name quite a few companies off the top of my head that use mostly Macs.”
That you’ve seen.
“Basing that on what? Using the word doubt makes it sound as if you don’t know much about Macs. They aren’t what they were in the 90s.”
They are still an overpriced, limited and closed platform.
>”What I’m saying is that Apple didn’t make it easy just now – it already was.”
“Then why aren’t new uses being thought up for it?”
Because it isn’t magic.
>”Macs are NOT better at this stuff then other platforms, however.”
“No one said they were.”
Didn’t you just do that above?
>” There is an annoying tendency on the Mac advocate side to paint every product from Apple as either new or best of breed – without even looking at the product – just because it’s from Apple.”
“No one has done that here.”
Except those who did.
>”They also have a tendency to believe marketing hype – from Apple. Are all Apple users like this? Certainly not. Are the advocates? Yes.”
“You haven’t done anything to prove wrong anything in this article. Show me where they are lieing about something?
Pretty much everything Apple’s marketing department comes up with is at the very least a serious stretch.
“Apple pulls it off by having the client software built into QuickTime. It’s standard on all OS X installs,
so there is no need to configure things later. And advantage of controlling hardware and software”
Apple pulls WHAT off? What are you talking about now?
you missed the point. They have Macs.There wasn’t Xgrid for Macs before.
Now there is and they use it and it helps them.
Apple’s recently-announced Workgroup Cluster for Bioinformatics has won the Best of Show 2004 award in the Information Technology Infrastructure category at the Bio-IT World Conference and Expo, being held at the Hynes Convention Center in Boston. The Apple Workgroup Cluster for Bioinformatics is a high-performance computing cluster based on the Xserve G5, aimed at providing a turnkey solution for scientists who have little or no IT support.
“We were very impressed with the comprehensive nature of the solution, its ease of deployment and management, and the large number of life science applications that come bundled with Apple’s entry.”
–John Russell, executive editor at Bio-IT World magazine…last week.
But hey, Apple has no place in this stuff at all, do they?
The Apple Workgroup Cluster for Bioinformatics provides a faster, easier and lower-cost path to scientific discovery. You’ll get rapid access to data analysis with minimal administrative burden in one comprehensive, industry-leading solution. All starting at $27,999.
Do-It-Yourself Cluster
You don’t have to be a computer scientist to set up a fully functioning UNIX-based computational cluster. Apple has assembled the parts you need in one easy-to-set up, easy-to-use cluster powerhouse. In about 30 minutes you’ll be ready to run BLAST, HMMER, fasta and more from a powerful, easy-to-use Web interface — the setup process installs over 200 bioinformatics applications on your cluster.
Scalable Research Tools
BioTeam’s iNquiry provides the tools — you provide the hypothesis. iNquiry provides the open-source software most often used by today’s bioinformaticians. Many tools, such as BLAST and HMMER, use the G5’s Velocity Engine for vastly improved performance over most other processors. iNquiry’s powerful Web interface lets you share your cluster with other researchers in your organization (or keep it to yourself). Since it’s open source, you can even add your own applications, too.
Industry-standard Platform
In addition to the open source tools you’re accustomed to using, the entire cluster infrastructure is based on open standards and open source. Darwin, the open source foundation for Mac OS X Server, is derived from rock solid BSD. Your cluster relies on the well-respected Sun Grid Engine for distributed resource management.
All-inclusive Hardware
Each Apple Workgroup Cluster for Bioinformatics includes an Xserve G5 head node with 750GB storage, an Asanté gigabit Ethernet switch for fast, reliable communications and an APC Smart-UPS uninterruptible power supply for added protection. Plus you get your choice of up to 15 Xserve G5 Cluster Nodes with up to 8GB of error correcting RAM — that’s up to 32 processors running at 2.0GHz. 2, 4 and 8 node clusters feature the XtremeMac Xrack Pro, a sound-suppressing enclosure that lets you place your cluster just about anywhere. The Xserve Service Parts Kit lets you be self-sufficient, minimizing potential downtime.
Organic Growth at Affordable Pace
Xserve G5 provides a 64-bit computing environment that meets your needs now and into the future. As your research expands, so can your cluster. When you place a new Xserve in your rack and connect it to the network, it will automatically copy the software and configuration files it needs, reboot and join the cluster with the press of a button. In short, you’ll spend less time and money tinkering, and more time and energy doing what you love: your research.
“Then show me where it’s simpler than putting 2 computers on a network and it working.”
It’s just that simple. The only complex thing is that the application has to be modified. Look up PVM, MPI, Array, ScreamerNet and the like. I don’t know how complicated you think non-Mac networking is – but it’s pretty dog simple.
wow, dude you got issues.
later.
“you missed the point. They have Macs.There wasn’t Xgrid for Macs before.
Now there is and they use it and it helps them. ”
You miss the point – this was easy before even WITH Macs. This is pretty simple on all major platforms.
“wow, dude you got issues.
later.”
wow, dude, you’re apparently on something.
“Non-pro apps haven’t really needed the capability.”
So someone rendering a large video at home on iMovie wouldn’t want extra speed at all, huh?
“The APIs – including the one Apple built XGrid on have been available…”
Yeah, because Apple never adds anything to this stuff…lol. Just having something available isn’t the same as having it implemented well. No one said this stuff was a new concept.
“Oh come on – not believing marketing is not buying into HYPE.”
Not all marketing is hype.
“No, it isn’t. Do yours.”
Why would they bother with a 64 bit G5 if they had no 64 bit addressing? It’s not Linux, you know.
“Again, unlikely.”
What points to this being unlikey? Things are moving that way faster and faster everyday.
“iMovie isn’t an embaressingly parallel task, so no.”
The point there is that iMovie would be a great application to use this with, and it’s an app that average users use.
“Certainly looks like it.”
I suppose you are talking about me? How exactly am I crowing? I never said this was a new concept, all I said was Apple will be using grid computing in ways it hasn’t been used before by bringing it to a point where average users have the will and the want to use it.
“These days, Windows XP. A few years ago – IRIX.”
You’re joking, right? IRIX is very limited these days, but yeah, it was good. XP is a joke. I could go on for many pages on how pathetic it is for media development.
“There are trends that become apparent in a maturing industry. ”
And the developing trend-soon-to-become-commonplace is grid computing for home use. People are now using computers for everyday tasks that could really take advantage of the extra power.
“And you’ve never looked at IRIX. They aren’t in the same class.”
Yes, I have looked at IRIX. A lot. And nothing I’ve seen in IRIX that relates to this discussion could not be easily handled by OS X.
“Pretty much – it is.”
Go visit Hyatt’s blog for info from the horses mouth on how misinformed you are.
“The “finally HPC for the masses” stuff.”
Saying it’s for the masses implies that it’s been around for a while. You are contraticting yourself.
“An OS update isn’t going to automagically parallelize your code either.”
http://developer.apple.com/macosx/
I suggest you look at how OS X works before commenting on that again.
“Just speaking from experience.”
Lol. That was very much nit-picking.
>”Which would be *what*, exactly?”
“Inertia. Windows also dominates 3D animation and engineering – and at least half of the copies of Photoshop sold.”
Actually, it’s just under half of the copies of Photoshop. And OS X now has 39% of the 3D market, a market they didn’t have any of a few years ago.
“You started on a Mac, right? It’s what you know. There is no technical superiority for those tasks on the Mac and the software is the same-
baring, of course, the packages that Apple buys and then cancels the PC port.”
Actually, I started on a Mac, but have used Linux and Windows extensively on a professional level for some years now, and I continue to be impressed by OS X. I loved using NeXTStep. I am a multimedia developer, and in that I have to support more than just one platform.
“You don’t understand – there are some operations that WILL NOT BENEFIT.”
And word processing hasn’t benefited much from the jump to 32 bit processors. Grid computing isn’t for everything, but it can certainly be used for more than it is now.
“That you’ve seen.”
It’s a well known fact that Macs are a mainstay in the media industry. You even said it yourself with your Photoshop sales estimate.
“They are still an overpriced, limited and closed platform.”
Wrong on all acounts. Overpriced depends on what you value. They aren’t that much more, feature for feature, than anything else. The software is unmatched. What exactly are they limited to? And they are a lot more open than OS 9 was. It’s not the old Apple. Much of OS X and it’s applications are open source. The idea is closed front ends with open standards, that allows a better user experience on all ends.
“Because it isn’t magic.”
In other words, it’s so far been overly complicated.
“Didn’t you just do that above?”
No, I said they are getting there.
“Except those who did.”
Must’ve missed it. Point it out for me, please.
“Pretty much everything Apple’s marketing department comes up with is at the very least a serious stretch.”
Point out some example, please.
“Apple pulls WHAT off? What are you talking about now?”
Apple pulls of ease of use and not having to install client software for every little thing by controlling the OS and the hardware.
“It’s just that simple. The only complex thing is that the application has to be modified. Look up PVM, MPI, Array, ScreamerNet and the like. I don’t know how complicated you think non-Mac networking is – but it’s pretty dog simple…You miss the point – this was easy before even WITH Macs. This is pretty simple on all major platforms.”
And now they are building it into the OS, making it transparent in all the needed applications, making it one step simpler than everything you have mentioned.
First of all, your conversation is *worse* than anything you’ll see on slashdot. You both seem to have some issues.
PanterPPC obviously doesn’t have a clue, and JCS doesn’t realise that it’s useless to feed some people with some facts.
Yes, Xgrid is probably more easy to install than other grid software. Maybe even the most easiest to install ever.
No, it’s not as mature as other grid solutions. And no, it’s not a real competitor nor a revolutionary thing that will change grid computing.
It simply lacks many features that other grid software provides (globus compatibility, checkpointing, fine grain ACLs, PVM support, …). Last but not least, Xgrid only runs on MacOS X, and that lack support for HPC aswell (e.g. real 64bit support. or CPU hot-plugging anyone?).
Refering to PantherPPC’s last post: another proof how clueless you are: your quoted article doesn’t talk about Xgrid, but it praises Apple with Sun Grid Engine.
To JCS: you are at least as stubborn as PantherPPC. Don’t try to convince everybody that you are right and everybody else isn’t. (even though I mostly agree with your statements)
You cannot compare Xgrid with any other professional grid software out there; Apple doesn’t have any history of grid computing, and others have developed and sold *working* grid solutions for years (Sun, Platform Computing, United Devices, PBS, Avaki, Entropia, Butterfly …)
>”Non-pro apps haven’t really needed the capability.”
“So someone rendering a large video at home on iMovie wouldn’t want extra speed at all, huh?”
I’m not sure it would buy them much of anything for a task like that.
>”No, it isn’t. Do yours.”
“Why would they bother with a 64 bit G5 if they had no 64 bit addressing? It’s not Linux, you know.”
Actually, if it was Linux on your G5, you’d have a 64-bit OS. *OS X IS NOT A 64-BIT OS*.
>”Again, unlikely.”
“What points to this being unlikey? Things are moving that way faster and faster everyday.”
Things aren’t moving toward the Mac.
>”iMovie isn’t an embaressingly parallel task, so no.”
“The point there is that iMovie would be a great application to use this with, and it’s an app that average users use.”
The point is that no, it wouldn’t.
>”These days, Windows XP. A few years ago – IRIX.”
“You’re joking, right? IRIX is very limited these days, but yeah, it was good. XP is a joke. ”
“I could go on for many pages on how pathetic it is for media development. ”
I’m sure you could. You’d also be wrong.
>”There are trends that become apparent in a maturing industry. ”
“And the developing trend-soon-to-become-commonplace is grid computing for home use.
“People are now using computers for everyday tasks that could really take advantage of the extra power. ”
No, that’s not the trend at all.
>”And you’ve never looked at IRIX. They aren’t in the same class.”
“Yes, I have looked at IRIX. A lot. And nothing I’ve seen in IRIX that relates to this discussion could not be easily handled by OS X.”
Except it can’t. OS X isn’t an SSI-on-a-cluster OS.
>”Pretty much – it is.”
“Go visit Hyatt’s blog for info from the horses mouth on how misinformed you are. ”
That’s nice. Really.
>”The “finally HPC for the masses” stuff.”
“Saying it’s for the masses implies that it’s been around for a while. You are contraticting yourself.”
It’s been *simple* for a while. That’s the point.
>”An OS update isn’t going to automagically parallelize your code either.”
“http://developer.apple.com/macosx/
I suggest you look at how OS X works before commenting on that again.”
I suggest you look into how *applications* work before you comment again. Really.
>”Which would be *what*, exactly?”
>”Inertia. Windows also dominates 3D animation and engineering – and at least half of the copies of Photoshop sold.”
“Actually, it’s just under half of the copies of Photoshop. And OS X now has 39% of the 3D market, a market they didn’t
have any of a few years ago.
Actually, no it doesn’t. The Mac has a far less.
“You started on a Mac, right? It’s what you know. There is no technical superiority for those tasks on the Mac and the software is the same-
baring, of course, the packages that Apple buys and then cancels the PC port.”
“And word processing hasn’t benefited much from the jump to 32 bit processors.
Grid computing isn’t for everything, but it can certainly be used for more than it is now.”
Which doesn’t require XGrid.
>”That you’ve seen.”
“It’s a well known fact that Macs are a mainstay in the media industry. You even said it yourself with your Photoshop sales estimate.”
The “media industry” – the Photoshop using corner of it – is relatively tiny.
>”They are still an overpriced, limited and closed platform.”
“Wrong on all acounts. Overpriced depends on what you value.
They aren’t that much more, feature for feature, than anything else. The software is unmatched.”
Nope. They are much more – especially when said features and options aren’t available – and the software is either
the same or inferior.
>”Because it isn’t magic.”
“In other words, it’s so far been overly complicated. ”
No. Read for comprehension.
“Point out some example, please. ”
“The G5 is the Fastest Desktop on the Planet!!!!”
“Apple pulls of ease of use and not having to install client software for every little thing by controlling the OS and the hardware. ”
That only, maybe works for FCP due to Quicktime. That doesn’t help any non-video and sound application – and won’t help most of those at all.
“And now they are building it into the OS, making it transparent in all the needed applications,
making it one step simpler than everything you have mentioned.”
It isn’t transparent in the application anymore then it is on any other platform. The *application* has to be written for it. It isn’t one step
simpler, but I imagine you’ve never heard of anything I just mentioned.
you say:
my point was that this is already available for not IT people. It is already easy
and then you say:
Look up PVM, MPI, Array, ScreamerNet and the like
well, ScreamerNet is specific product (rendering), what is Array you mention?
others are source distributions (at best), which automatically put them out of reach of “not IT people”
“To JCS: you are at least as stubborn as PantherPPC. Don’t try to convince everybody that you are right and everybody else isn’t.”
Oh, I didn’t say everyone else here was wrong. Primarily just PantherPPC. What’s the point of arguing if you don’t try to convince someone of something? Come on, we’ve got someone here who thinks that OS X is a 64-bit OS because Apple used a 64-bit chip and then demands that I visit Apple’s developer site for insight into how OS X apparently dynamically autoparallelizes your code for you!
If there’s any gold here it’s the comedy!
“well, ScreamerNet is specific product (rendering), what is Array you mention?”
http://www.sgi.com/software/array/
“others are source distributions (at best), which automatically put them out of reach of “not IT people””
If that’s true then so is XGrid. XGrid provides an *API*. The others are APIs. Some *are* delivered as source so that you can compile them for your target platform, but most are also available as downloadable binaries. There are even commercial variants that are even more easy to deal with.
Even *XGrid* is essentially for the “IT people”, as you put it.
Oh, I didn’t say everyone else here was wrong. Primarily just PantherPPC. What’s the point of arguing if you don’t try to convince someone of something?
I agree. But what’s the point of trying to convince somebody why doesn’t want to be convinced? You’ll never succeed …
But maybe I’m just taking the whole conversation to seriously; and perhaps you (JCL) and PantherPPC are even the same person and you try to fool us all! ;-P
Max
” agree. But what’s the point of trying to convince somebody why doesn’t want to be convinced? You’ll never succeed … ”
True.
“But maybe I’m just taking the whole conversation to seriously; and perhaps you (JCL) and PantherPPC are even the same person and you try to fool us all! ;-P ”
That’s be a horrible thought.
thanks for sgi link.
you say:
most are also available as downloadable binaries. There are even commercial variants that are even more easy to deal with
not-IT user won’t find those binaries, and if someone helps – won’t know what to do with them. Commercial variants, as I understand, are tools for custom solutions to be implemented on user site by specialists.
XGrid is first (which I know about) “off-the-shelf boxed-product” that a normal user can install on his/her network of a dozen or two of consumer pcs which is being cared for not by unix professional(s), but by average Joe-sysadmin who can do make install but won’t get to that point because doesn’t know what to do about errors during make.
you would ask why do they need grid at all? – but that is ANOTHER question which is beyond the scope of original article – and thus beyond scope of this discussion.
“not-IT user won’t find those binaries, and if someone helps – won’t know what to do with them. Commercial variants, as I understand, are tools for custom solutions to be implemented on user site by specialists. ”
Why not? In either case, the code you’re using has to be modified to use it. Same with XGrid.
“XGrid is first (which I know about) “off-the-shelf boxed-product” that a normal user can install on his/her network of a dozen or two of consumer pcs which is being cared for not by unix professional(s), but by average Joe-sysadmin who can do make install but won’t get to that point because doesn’t know what to do about errors during make. ”
I don’t believe XGrid does what you think it does. It’s an implementation of BEEP (IBM has one too).
i said;
Commercial variants, as I understand, are tools for custom solutions to be implemented on user site by specialists
you said:
Why not? In either case, the code you’re using has to be modified to use it
I am arguing neither for nor against it. I just point to the fact that moves other grid solutions beyond “non-IT user”-space
you say:
I don’t believe XGrid does what you think it does
that must be a misunderstanding. what is that you think I think xgrid does ? I didn’t say a word about what xgrid does. All I say is that xgrid is the only grid which non-“unix professional” is able to install and use (whatever that usage would be).
you say:
IBM has one too
well, IBM has everything. They just won’t sell you a cd with soft to install. they insist they come and install and customise and support the “solution” on your site – themselves. on their hardware – to get better results.
yeah, that is grid for non-IT user. non-IT user with big money.
“Refering to PantherPPC’s last post: another proof how clueless you are: your quoted article doesn’t talk about Xgrid, but it praises Apple with Sun Grid Engine.”
The link wasn’t about XGrid, it was referring to a previous post about Apple not having a change in this market.
“I’m not sure it would buy them much of anything for a task like that.”
If it cut rendering time in half, which it could easily do, it would be a great benefit.
“Actually, if it was Linux on your G5, you’d have a 64-bit OS. *OS X IS NOT A 64-BIT OS*.”
Once again, I didn’t say it was a 64 bit OS, I said it was a 32 bit OS with 64 bit addressing.
“Things aren’t moving toward the Mac.”
First off, that’s just trolling. Secondly, Macs are quickly moving into many markets where the previously didn’t compete.
“The point is that no, it wouldn’t.”
Why would it not? The pro apps do it, even the XServe was made for doing this. Why would consumer apps not benefit?
“I’m sure you could. You’d also be wrong.”
XP is absolutely pathetic for media development, it can’t even run the better applications.
“No, that’s not the trend at all.”
Hence how I put the word ‘developing’ in front of the word trend. Trend implies it’s already there, developing trend implies it will be there.
“Except it can’t. OS X isn’t an SSI-on-a-cluster OS.”
Actually, yes it is…
‘Mac OS X NetBoot feature makes it easy to manage cluster nodes as if they were a single system. You can create a centralized disk image on the head node and deploy it across all the nodes in the compute cluster.’
“It’s been *simple* for a while. That’s the point.”
Simple for an engineer, yes. Simple for those same people you keep saying couldn’t use it, no.
“I suggest you look into how *applications* work before you comment again. Really.”
If I’m so ignorant of the issue, then please explain what I am missing.
“Actually, no it doesn’t. The Mac has a far less.”
videography.com
“Which doesn’t require XGrid.”
Of course word processing doesn’t require XGrid. That was the point. That not every single thing would be improved, but a lot of things would.
“The “media industry” – the Photoshop using corner of it – is relatively tiny.”
Well, okay, other than Photoshop, let’s look at some other top selling apps. A quick jump from Photoshop brings us to the Adobes other apps, mainly Illustrator and InDesign, which are just as strong on Macs as Photoshop is. Then there’s Apples own applications…Final Cut (an industry standard), DVD Studio Pro, Shake (Lord of the Rings, anyone?), Logic (also a standard). Related applications are also big sellers on the Mac side, such as Pro Tools, and Avids products. Maya is also a big Mac seller, and your often noted 3DS Max is in the process of moving onto OS X.
“Nope. They are much more – especially when said features and options aren’t available”
Such as?
” and the software is either the same or inferior.”
So you have something on par with FCP 4 and DVD Studio Pro?
“No. Read for comprehension.”
Comprehension. Okay. Let’s try that. I assume by you saying it isn’t magic that you mean it isn’t something that just happens. As in it isn’t easy. Which brings us back to ‘it’s so far been overly complicated’.
“The G5 is the Fastest Desktop on the Planet!!!!”
Actually, they said it was the first 64 bit personal computer. Which it was. A personal computer consists of hardware and software that is used by normal people, not geeks. There were other 64 bit chips out at the time, but the mainly ran Linux and Unix, neither of which are commonly accepted as being ‘normal person’ operating systems, and Windows wouldn’t run on them at all. That leaves the G5. It’s not the fastest chip in the world, no. It was the fastest personal computer at the time they announced it. Nothing stays on top forever. Right now it’s AMD. Once the G5s get updated again, they will be. For a little while.
“That only, maybe works for FCP due to Quicktime.”
That works in the whole set of apps.
“That doesn’t help any non-video and sound application”
Not yet. It’s getting there.
“and won’t help most of those at all.”
With QuickTime handling all the heavy lifting, any QuickTime based application has the chance to take advantage of it. And many do.
“It isn’t transparent in the application anymore then it is on any other platform. The *application* has to be written for it. It isn’t one step
simpler, but I imagine you’ve never heard of anything I just mentioned.”
It isn’t transparent any more than on any other platform now, no, but it will be. As you yourself have said, grid computing has been on all platforms for a while, even Macs. But now with Apple getting into it themselves it has a good change of becoming transparent. They have a habit of building things right into the OS.
“What’s the point of arguing if you don’t try to convince someone of something?”
Ironically enough, that I agree with you on.
“Come on, we’ve got someone here who thinks that OS X is a 64-bit OS because Apple used a 64-bit chip”
No, No, No. That is NOT what I said. I said OS X is a 32 bit OS with 64 bit addressing. The 64 bit addressing started in 10.2.8.
“demands that I visit Apple’s developer site for insight into how OS X apparently dynamically autoparallelizes your code for you”
Once again you are putting words in my mouth. Go back and read again.
What I was getting at to start with was that this isn’t something new, just a new reason for doing it. For non-engineers, so to speak. Grid computing has a lot of untapped potential and can be used for a lot more than it is now. Somehow you got the idea that I said it was something Apple invented, which I never said. And somehow you keep thinking I said OS X was a 64 bit OS, which I never said. I said 32 bit OS with 64 bit addressing. Simple concept.
Why not? In either case, the code you’re using has to be modified to use it
I am arguing neither for nor against it. I just point to the fact that moves other grid solutions beyond “non-IT user”-space
How? It is easier to install. Agreed. Is it easier to use? Not really. At least not for now. Look at this example: http://unu.novajo.ca/simple/archives/000024.html
Maybe there will be some ‘Xgrid-enabled’ applications in the future that will seamlessly integrate with Xgrid and let you run that specific application in a parallel cluster environment – that means. in your home network – without worries.
Anyway, I doubt there is much demand/use for such applications for a typical user. And I doubt that Xgrid will change the demand for grid-enabled software.
Xgrid is not designed to be used in real professional HPC environments with e.g. >10 nodes. It doesn’t provide monitoring. It doesn’t support Job suspension or checkpointing. And thats just the beginning …
Xgrid is something like ad-hoc grid computing. If you want a professional grid, look somewhere else. At least for the next 5 years.
I agree with all you say, except may be for:
doubt that Xgrid will change the demand for grid-enabled software
and the osx marketshare adds weight to your doubt. still it sets an example of easy entering into grids. and once the path is shown, it will be explored. besides I want people to have easy-to-install-and-use grids and grid-enabled apps. Do you?
It is easier to install. Agreed. Is it easier to use? Not really
actually when saying use I meant run.
Actually, if it was Linux on your G5, you’d have a 64-bit OS. *OS X IS NOT A 64-BIT OS*.
Once again, I didn’t say it was a 64 bit OS, I said it was a 32 bit OS with 64 bit addressing.
Which would make Windows 2000/2003 also a 64bit OS by definition. Let me explain.
Panther uses a very similar technique to PAE on Intel Pentium/Xeon (32bit) CPUs to be able to address more than 32bit:
You are only able to use more than 4GB in segments, but not in a linear way. Furthermore your application has to be written in a way that it supports this addressing scheme, otherwise you won’t be able to use more than 4GB.
The G5 is the Fastest Desktop on the Planet!!!!
Actually, they said it was the first 64 bit personal computer. Which it was.
Not. Just to clarify things:
I remember DEC Alpha’s being advertised and sold at several big PC distributors (e.g. Vobis, Highscreen Alpha 5000), for reasonable prices, ie. for the masses.
E.g. the Highscreen Alpha was sold 1997, and the price was less than $3000 (for the low end version). It came with Windows NT 3.51 and later NT 4.0, and of course the FX/32 software that allowed you to run Windows/Intel programmes.
Of course Windows NT/Alpha wasn’t really a 64bit OS (like Panther is no 64bit OS either).
I also know that before that time MIPS machines were sold (also running WindowsNT), but I don’t know whether those were already 64bit (ie. R4000 CPU) or not …
… once the path is shown, it will be explored. besides I want people to have easy-to-install-and-use grids and grid-enabled apps. Do you?
Yes, certainly, why not?
I just think that Apple does a really ‘good’ marketing with Xgrid … promising that it is the ultimate tool in grid computing, whereas it is
– not usable for ‘real’, professional grid computing
– still requires grid applications to be written in the usual way, since …
– no innovation in comparision to existing grid software, because it is …
– just based on an existing grid technology, albeit it comes with a nice installer and superb integration in MacOS X.
And of course suddenly all MacOS advocates – most of them ARE grid computing newbies – are convinced that Apple is really doing something new and revolutionary …
As JCL said: it’s not new.
And I’ll add to it: it’s just shiny.
I love how you guys make assumptions about Mac users.
The thing Apple is trying to do here is, like you said, tie this right into OS X. It’s not new or revolutionary, but they could very well be the first to pull off grid computing on an everyday level by making it simple to implement in consumer applications.
I love how you guys make assumptions about Mac users.
Can’t see sarcasm without <sarcasm> tags?
Anyway, you said:
…but they could very well be the first to pull off grid computing on an everyday level by making it simple to implement in consumer applications.
Well, and I tried to show that
– they don’t make it simpler for the developers, since they are still using the same grid techniques/APIs
– everything and more is already available, people just have to install it (not difficult)
– the nice GUI of Xgraph is not the issue here
See, the problem with grid computing is that there is actually not a real demand for the average user:
– Grid computing means remote, distributed computing. Most users want interactivity and a snappy GUI
– Most often grid computing means that it uses several nodes in parallel. Most user’s problems aren’t of a parallel nature.
– Grid computing requires that a job can be executed on any node of the grid. Users usually only have one or two PCs.
– A nice GUI doesn’t change anything of the above
well…
its new because its the first time there has been a vendor supported system level (kinda) distributed system from a mainstream OS vendor.. (meaning realistically… Apple or Microsoft)
its doesn’t matter that its been done before by sun, IBM whoever… its the first time someone has made a plug for distributed computing in a mainstream desktop OS… come 10.4 i think its a pretty safe bet that XGrid (remember its only a tech preview at this stage) will be installed by default on every mac..
a few people have mentioned that you will have to modify your code to make it work.. but the reality is going to be that the vast majority of users are going to be using off the self apps with this… “they” wont be touching the code.. adobe, or Digidesign, or Alias will be
it will mean about as much to people as audio units do today.. under the hood cool stuff that makes your app better…
an Apple supported OS level system means anyone wanting to make their app distributable will have a common base to work upon, rather than the current situation were different apps have their own incompatible systems…
someone brought up ScreamerNet earlier, now ill assume they are talking about ScreamerNet as in the Lightwave network rendering… im sorry, but having used screamernet and Xgrid… screamernet doesn’t even compare to the ease of use of xgrid…
my main hope with xgrid is that it takes care of piping the data around for graphics applications, rather than relying on having the relevant volumes mounted on the client machine. this being the main issue with setting up true ad-hoc clusters… its nice in theory to pop the secretary’s machine on the farm when they arnt using it… but once to have to install apps, and plugins and get permissions and all that crap sorted out, it fast becomes not worth it….
but if xgrid can take care of all that… and just leave you with a situation where you say, right… i can see that machine via rendezvous… its on the cluster… and have all the excutable code and work data sent there without any additional mucking about… then you have a winner….
my point is, if the APIs to do this are standand and included with every mac.. then developers and users alike can make use of cluster technology without A: writing their own system.. or B: setting up the cluster beyond flipping the “make part of cluster switch”
as for it being only mac based… the article implies that it wouldn’t be impossible to make the client side run under other platforms… so im sure some clever chaps in the OSS world with figure that out in the not to distant..
and yeah. certain applications wouldn’t benifit… but FCP (which doesnt do any distributed processing at this stage) could benefit.. say… assuming this becomes a common standard on the mac.. and assuming technologies like melanox’s infiniband become comodified. then people will be able to setup workstation/clusters…. say with a G5 desktop as the main machine… with 4 XServe cluster nodes connected via a massive pipe to each other.. with a nice chunky raid… well id say you have something pretty workable for distributed video work.
(yes i know people use clusters for video work atm… but never in situations where you need realtime feedback, it always in situations where you can do a complex setup, then fire and forget.. not online video editing where you need to see the results RIGHT NOW…… perhaps the above situation might work there)
where did you hear 3DS-MAX was being ported to MacOSX?
ive heard no such thing.
and can find nothing to corroborate your statement
It is painfully apparent that I did not make myself clear in my previous post, so I will attempt to better explain my position. But, I will first respond to your comments:
#1.
>> That’s appropos of nothing. I most certainly view a computer as a tool – I just view the Mac as not a superior tool. <<
As it has been said before in this thread, nobody really has been making the claim that the solution Apple provides is superior. It is just easy and elegant. The simple fact remains that your constant attack of the Apple solution provides evidence that you view a computer as more than just a tool.
#2
>> What embaressingly parallel task would that be? <<
I see, only you have important, non-embarrasing computational tasks to perform? I never really intended to compare either urgency or importance between our respective occupations. Although if you would like to, I guess we can have a pissing contest.
#3
>> What makes you think it’d only require one programmer if you use the XGrid API over something older and better supported like MPI? What extra hardware do you think is required for a Network of Workstations not running XGrid? Nothing. <<
I was only using the 1 to 3 as an example. Try to understand it this way: Xgrid is as simple to install as Microsoft Office. If you had an office of 25 Macs, anybody that can install office can install and configure the Xgrid agent, set the preferences and be done with the configuration. As for programmers to write the parallel calls? You would need at least 1, therefore I used the lowest number.
#4
>> Guess what: you don’t really understand what this package does. <<
Guess what, neither do you… Nah nah nah < sticking tongue out >
>> Apple’s solutions are NOT trouble free. <<
In comparison to most platforms out there, yes they are pretty much trouble free.
To make my position nice and clear. Apple’s Xgrid software makes setting up a grid easy. It requires little to no maintenance to stay running past normal network support. It will require custom programing to take advantage of parallel message passing. It will not solve the problems of the world. It may be no better or no worse than other solutions. It is elegant.
Now, to leave you with these final comments;
So far all I have read from you indicates that you are basing everything you say off of opinion, half-facts and FUD. You begin your comments as if you actually have evidence to support your position, but you never really present any. Then, you challenge the other posters to present you evidence to support you callous, inflammatory and rather childish rebuttals.
You know who you remind me of? The computer guy from SNL. Nobody has the understanding, capability or knowledge of systems that you do.
Later,
Fuji
Alex, there have been rumors about 3DS Max being ported to OS X for about 2 years now, as I recall Think Secret was the first to talk about it. Check their archives. Discreet may or may not be mad at Apple right now over lost Cleaner sales due to Compressor (there’s a possibility Apple bought/licensed the code from them).
You know who you remind me of? The computer guy from SNL. Nobody has the understanding, capability or knowledge of systems that you do.
heh, Nick Burns
What embaressingly parallel task would that be?
I see, only you have important, non-embarrasing computational tasks to perform? I never really intended to compare either urgency or importance between our respective occupations. Although if you would like to, I guess we can have a pissing contest.
JCS was refering to “embaressingly parallel” tasks, as mentioned in the article. IE problems that are of a true parallel nature and are perfect candidates for grid computing.
As I also said in earlier posts, the average user doesn’t have these kinds of “embarassingly parallel” problems.
Guess what: you don’t really understand what this package does.
Guess what, neither do you… Nah nah nah < sticking tongue out >
I tend to believe that JCS has more clue about this topic than you. I can only guess from his statements, but it seems that he has (also) worked with computational grids before. At least his comments on grid computing fit with my experience on this topic.
It would be interesting to know who else here has some experience with grid computing …
It [Apple Xgrid] may be no better or no worse than other solutions. It is elegant.
It has a elegant GUI. It is worse (technically inferior) to existing solutions. It may be suitable for home-grid computing. But not much more for the time being.
>> JCS was refering to “embaressingly parallel” tasks, as mentioned in the article. IE problems that are of a true parallel nature and are perfect candidates for grid computing.
As I also said in earlier posts, the average user doesn’t have these kinds of “embarassingly parallel” problems. <<
Considering the tone of his comments, I took this the wrong way( basically as a play on the concept ) I apologize for that.
>> I tend to believe that JCS has more clue about this topic than you. I can only guess from his statements, but it seems that he has (also) worked with computational grids before. At least his comments on grid computing fit with my experience on this topic. <<
Because I choose not to get into a pissing contest about who knows more about what is no reason for you to suspect anything about my experience level. I know nothing of yours, so to comment on it would be childish.
>> It has a elegant GUI. It is worse (technically inferior) to existing solutions. It may be suitable for home-grid computing. But not much more for the time being. <<
I will respect your opinion, but politely disagree. Look, I am not going to tell you that Apple’s solution is the end all, be all of grid applications. However, if they can simplify the roll out of a computational grid, more power to them. As to your comment about Xgrid being technically inferior, let us remember that it is a Technology Preview, not a final product. It may improve, it may not.
Overall, if Apple can release a product that simplifies the way I can solve a problem, I am in. I am not looking to struggle with anything I don’t have to. I am not looking to become a platform zealot. I am a complete platform independent. I will use whatever solves the problem at hand in the easiest fashion.
If that means 20 Linux boxes running in a Beowulf cluster, I’m in. 20 Xservers w/ Xgrid.. ok. Custom grid software from Virginia Tech…whatever.
-Fuji
ok…
just checked that out…
3 years ago… an apple rumor site said they discreet might release it… then put out another article retracting the first one….
…. got anything else
“…. got anything else”
I’ve seen quite a few articles on it since then, that was just the first I’d heard of it. I didn’t pay much attention because I like Maya better. If I come across the others I’ll post them.