Cloud Computing

I love my dropbox

Cloud computing is gmail, google can lose a data center and your e-mail will continue to function as normal with probably no data loss.

The cloud is not everything on the internet.

laugh wrote: »

Cloud computing is gmail, google can lose a data center and your e-mail will continue to function as normal with probably no data loss.

The cloud is not everything on the internet.

so the cloud = fault-tolerance ?

your right this never existed before the "cloud"

ntlbell wrote: »

so the cloud = fault-tolerance ?

your right this never existed before the "cloud"

Certainly not fault tolerance at the scale that is gmail.

laugh wrote: »

Cloud computing is gmail, google can lose a data center and your e-mail will continue to function as normal with probably no data loss.

The cloud is not everything on the internet.

laugh wrote: »

Certainly not fault tolerance at the scale that is gmail.

Redundancy is at the very core of the internet, it was a fundamental characteristic of the internet way back when it was first being conceived.

It is not an exclusive characteristic of "cloud computing".

bnt wrote: »

Gmail? I use it in a browser, but you can set up a normal mail program like Outlook or Thunderbird to work with it - and then you can store your mail locally.

Google Docs? Up to you. Backing up a lot of documents at once is a doddle: select, right-click, Download. It will convert them all to Office formats where required, and zip them up nicely.

You can get a Gmail app that works offline (to some extent anyway) and I believe they're working on a similar app for Google Docs.

That's something that sort of undermines their Chromebook/"everything in the cloud" approach but is obviously completely necessary in today's world.

laugh wrote: »

There is a massive difference between redundancy in networking and in data. The way google stores and syncs data is at the core of the true concept of the cloud.

Redundant storage is also as old as the internet, and not ground-breaking.

"Cloud Computing" has nothing to do with how Google, or anyone else, stores their data.

A lot of those in IT who are most strongly opposed to cloud computing are opposed because if/when it comes fully into operation a lot of their expertise/the reason for their job will disappear. That's not to say there arent downsides to cloud computing but a lot of the negatives being put out there are by those with vested interests in the status quo.

There is also a fair chunk of marketing hype attached to it, some of which is due to some companies just sticking the word cloud on stuff that is only somewhat related.

Ultimately it will come down to better performance/lower cost/ease of use - when a lot of stuff that is related to cloud computing is implemented it will make things much easier.

As for security a lot of people will say that storing your information in the cloud isnt safe. Personally I'd be a lot more comfortable dealing with a business that was using Amazon or Google's servers to store my data compared to having it stored on a standard company's own server.

The big companies like Amazon and Google have the top experts working 24/7 around the clock and take data security very seriously, whereas if your data is stored on a standard company's own server you are probably relying on the IT security skills of the company's own staff (who are unlikely to be of the top rank) in a company that probably doesn't have data security as a key priority.

Seachmall wrote: »

I don't know the specifics of how Google store their data but the concept of redundant storage is quite old, yes.

How Google stores data is important for making their services practical to use but it is not a definitive characteristic of "cloud computing", and it's certainly not an exclusive one.

Yes, yes they were.

I do know the technologies that they have put in the public domain that make cloud technologies of any reasonable scale work. Google begot Aws which begot netflicks/facebook/large scale hosting.

Seachmall wrote: »

But once again, it's not a defining characteristic nor is it a new concept.

I know what you are saying; you could offer a service on the internet sync a reasonable amount of data from one location to another, or from one server to another, in the even of loss of one machine/connection/location you can bring it up in another location in a reasonable amount of time.

To me the cloud is seem-less large scale services of the type that just were not possible before the googles/amazons/facebooks of this world started building massive data centres connected to each other by massive pipes and using the latest data technologies like the google file-system.

Isn't cloud computing more or less a shift from more traditional computer organisation of programs installed on your local machine like games, office suites and other software being based in and accessed from the "cloud". Most casual computer users won't see a difference between their normal computing activities and the shift to the cloud. Most regular computer users only really use the internet for their computer interaction. They can get by with a browser.

The move to the cloud is supposed to signify the shift of local programs being retailed in shops to being subscribed to as a service on the net. Microsoft Word for example would no longer be installed on your hard disk but accessed over the internet.

We see this already in Google Documents but the idea is we will see these services less on out local machines - which has its benefits and its drawbacks for suppliers and consumers.