Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Uwe Thiem <uwix@××××.na>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: anti-portage wreckage?
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 20:58:45
Message-Id: 200612312248.36362.uwix@iway.na
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: anti-portage wreckage? by Mick
1 On 31 December 2006 20:20, Mick wrote:
2 > On Sunday 31 December 2006 16:02, Uwe Thiem wrote:
3
4 > > This won't happen for various reasons.
5 > >
6 > > In the business world, the main reason is security. Who will trust
7 > > an "Internet Desktop Provider" with their internal documents?
8 >
9 > The same people who are trusting a multitude of outsourcing companies with
10 > their HR, Payroll, logistics, IT management and support, procurement,
11 > marketing, public relations, project delivery, . . . , you get the drift.
12 > I wouldn't trust them any more than you do, but in the world of hollow
13 > corporations there are a multitude of companies out there who would trust
14 > nearly anybody to "take this problem away".
15
16 On the other hand, I know enough companies that don't do that - and I do IT
17 consultancy jobs for them. I don't doubt that a large number of companies is
18 hollow and stupid. The questions is what the ratio is between those that
19 store their latest blueprints inhouse and those that don't. I do not know. Do
20 you? I mean hard numbers, not guesses. The other question is what the top 100
21 will do. Will Ford keep their internal strategic papers on the servers of an
22 Internet Desktop Provider (IDP)? Will Dow Chemical? DaimlerChrysler? Exxon?
23 You get the drift. ;-)
24
25 >
26 > > In the world of home computing, there are actually two main reasons. The
27 > > first is porn.
28 >
29 > Why does porn need to stored locally?!
30
31 Many daddies John Doe might not understand the implications of storing
32 potentially embarrassing (and often illegal) data on someone else's servers.
33 Many, if not the majority, will at least have their suspicions and probably
34 chicken out of IDPs.
35
36 How significant is this? Well, I had the task to analyse the logs of a
37 transparent proxy of a local ISP for some time. It was quite amazing. Just
38 short of 50% of HTTP traffic was porn. About 80% of their subscribers were
39 regular porn site visitors. So yes, it is significant.
40
41 >
42 > > The second is nearly photo-realistic games.
43 >
44 > Of course. That is I think one area where a thin client will not be able
45 > to compete with a modern desktop PC. I don't play games and haven't seen
46 > what sort of latency a game played through FreeNX can achieve. On the
47 > other hand future gaming may be left to games consoles?
48
49 NX is a truly amazing technology. I tried a full KDE desktop over a bloody
50 modem line, and it reacted as if local. Still, the games I am talking about
51 put a far higher stress on the local system *and* the bandwidth. Still, if
52 thin clients would get far better video subsystems *and* much more ram they
53 might do the trick.
54
55 >
56 > > Another, not that important, reason is that there are vast areas in the
57 > > world where bandwidth is insufficient and far too expensive for it.
58 >
59 > Indeed, although most of these vast areas are sparsely populated and some
60 > of them are wired up as we speak - a friend who visited China 3 years ago
61 > mentioned that the gov't was laying yellow fibre-optic cables right across
62 > the country.
63
64 While China is a huge part of the world population-wise. it isn't all of it
65 outside the US. Besides, fibre-optics aren't all of it. We have a backbone of
66 them as well. Still, the average bandwidth a client can expect is somewhere
67 between 3 and 4 KB/s.
68
69 Anyway, since you use gmail.com, you are at least outsourcing your email. ;-)
70 Not too bad, I admit - as long as you aren't sending incriminating or simply
71 confidential stuff through them.
72
73 Uwe
74
75 --
76 A fast and easy generator of fractals for KDE:
77 http://www.SysEx.com.na/iwy-1.0.tar.bz2
78 --
79 gentoo-user@g.o mailing list