Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!apple.com!desnoyer
From: desnoyer@apple.com (Peter Desnoyers)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: fad computing
Message-ID: <5417@internal.Apple.COM>
Date: 27 Nov 89 19:10:09 GMT
Sender: usenet@Apple.COM
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 38
References:<89Nov25.051946est.2233@neat.cs.toronto.edu> <10446@encore.Encore.COM> <1989Nov26.204924.24209@world.std.com>

In article <1989Nov26.204924.24209@world.std.com> bzs@world.std.com (Barry 
Shein) writes:
> What's being discussed are the *central* services that cross workgroup
> lines and, hence, are usually administered by a third-party entity
> who's only justification for existence is to manage the resources.
> 
The biggest problems I have seen with central computing facilities have 
been when one group (computer operations) looks good (i.e. comes in under 
budget) at the expense of another group (whose schedule slips due to lack 
of computing resources).

This is just one of many cases where the wrong rules cause inefficiency or 
worse. It can happen anywhere, not just in computer operations. Office 
space and layout is another area that is often handled by people with 
objectives orthogonal to those of the actual engineers using the place.

Personally, I think that there will come a time when mainframe-type 
computers will come into vogue again. Why? Because if you concentrate N 
queues, each with server rate 1, onto a single queue with server rate N, 
your expected wait goes down by a factor of N. Some of the main reasons 
why workstations are currently popular are (IMHO):

 (1) the current $/compute horsepower curve increases faster than O(N). If 
your rate N server costs $N^2, then you are no better off than if you had 
bought a bunch of workstations. Future technologies (e.g. parallelism) may 
flatten this curve enough to give a decided advantage to large compute 
servers.

 (2) political reasons within organizations. Computer centers look out for 
their own interests, rather than the groups they provide services for. 
Budgets may be done in a way that hides the recurring costs of workstation 
maintenance, while emphasising this cost for computer center use. Etc., 
etc. If these problems are worth fixing, rather than doing away with 
altogether - well, that's what management consultants are for.

                                      Peter Desnoyers
                                      Apple ATG
                                      (408) 974-4469


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com