3 ms·

> and most software on Linux is distributed as source Clearly you aren't purchasing much software. If you're one of the (majority of) large software companies

> and most software on Linux is distributed as source Clearly you aren't purchasing much software. If you're one of the (majority of) large software companies that use precompiled binaries from vendors for any of the components in your systems, you're at the mercy of which architectures your vendor(s) support.

zozbot234 7y ago
How many of those "precompiled binaries" are truly performance critical? If it's just a single component, you can run it in qemu-user mode and still come out ahead overall.
- tverbeure 7y ago
  How many of those precompiled binaries are performance critical? How about all? From the software that runs for hours to compile a model, the software that calculates results, to the interactive analysis software that needs to load GBs of data. The whole reason to run these things on a server farm is that you need large and fast machines that are better shared to make sure they get optimal use of the machine and of the license pool.
  - ninkendo 7y ago
    Is this the archetypal AWS customer that drives the majority of intel’s sales to AMZN? That not only has lock-in with a closed source vendor, but that vendor is not agile enough to give ARM binaries for AWS workloads? Doubtful IMO. Maybe for EDA and CAD/CAM setups, but somehow I doubt those are enough to keep Intel as we know them afloat. Intel has huge reason to fear ARM on the server.
    - tverbeure 7y ago
      I was thinking about server farms in general, not AWS specifically. You’re probably right that AWS-type server are more likely to skew towards software that is available in source form.
    - timthorn 7y ago
      A commercial EDA tool was one of the use cases benchmarked in the source article.
imtringued 7y ago
Yeah exactly, you're not going to skimp on the CPU by choosing ARM to save $500 a year when you have software that costs you thousands every single year. You're going to stick with x86_64 instead of the crappy budget option that doesn't even run your software.
- asah 7y ago
  Twist: enterprise software goes the way of IBM mainframes, with a small number of large customers paying crazy prices for compliance and customization, and everything in the hardware/software stack being 10+x more expensive than its commodity equivalent.
- baroffoos 7y ago
  Not every corporation has proprietary x86 binaries they need to run on a server. Every company I have worked at has had entirely open source server software and a few proprietary javascript libraries.
__d 7y ago
Does anyone run proprietary software in a cloud context? The whole point is that the hardware becomes as flexible as the software, spin up, spin down, blow it away and deploy a fresh instance if something goes wrong. I can't see many people trying to do that with proprietary licensing?
- closeparen 7y ago
  Absolutely. You can even get the license and support contract costs built into the instance’s hourly rate. RHEL, Oracle DB, Windows Server, and SQL Server are all offered this way.

zozbot234 7y ago

How many of those "precompiled binaries" are truly performance critical? If it's just a single component, you can run it in qemu-user mode and still come out ahead overall.

tverbeure 7y ago
How many of those precompiled binaries are performance critical? How about all? From the software that runs for hours to compile a model, the software that calculates results, to the interactive analysis software that needs to load GBs of data. The whole reason to run these things on a server farm is that you need large and fast machines that are better shared to make sure they get optimal use of the machine and of the license pool.
- ninkendo 7y ago
  Is this the archetypal AWS customer that drives the majority of intel’s sales to AMZN? That not only has lock-in with a closed source vendor, but that vendor is not agile enough to give ARM binaries for AWS workloads? Doubtful IMO. Maybe for EDA and CAD/CAM setups, but somehow I doubt those are enough to keep Intel as we know them afloat. Intel has huge reason to fear ARM on the server.
  - tverbeure 7y ago
    I was thinking about server farms in general, not AWS specifically. You’re probably right that AWS-type server are more likely to skew towards software that is available in source form.
  - timthorn 7y ago
    A commercial EDA tool was one of the use cases benchmarked in the source article.

imtringued 7y ago

Yeah exactly, you're not going to skimp on the CPU by choosing ARM to save $500 a year when you have software that costs you thousands every single year. You're going to stick with x86_64 instead of the crappy budget option that doesn't even run your software.

asah 7y ago
Twist: enterprise software goes the way of IBM mainframes, with a small number of large customers paying crazy prices for compliance and customization, and everything in the hardware/software stack being 10+x more expensive than its commodity equivalent.
baroffoos 7y ago
Not every corporation has proprietary x86 binaries they need to run on a server. Every company I have worked at has had entirely open source server software and a few proprietary javascript libraries.

__d 7y ago

Does anyone run proprietary software in a cloud context? The whole point is that the hardware becomes as flexible as the software, spin up, spin down, blow it away and deploy a fresh instance if something goes wrong. I can't see many people trying to do that with proprietary licensing?

closeparen 7y ago
Absolutely. You can even get the license and support contract costs built into the instance’s hourly rate. RHEL, Oracle DB, Windows Server, and SQL Server are all offered this way.