Cloud computing?

[Bruv119]

Would it be possible for AH to run on one of these services?   I've seen some games being played on it and whilst the technology is still being perfected it could open up some possibilities. 

This should eliminate any hardware deficiencies and maybe improve overall lag to the game server and reduce the round trip time by a few hops.

[katanaso]

Basically, anything can be run in a "cloud" environment.  AH is just a client/server application, like umpteen thosands of other games or business applications.

It might be cost/benefit as to the reasoning behind the location of the hardware.

[Kazaa]

Cloud gaming is far from perfection. Seems more of a gimmick in its current state.

[Skuzzy]

There is nothing to be gained (it will not reduce lag, it will add to it) and a lot ot risks involved (security and other issues).

On top of that, there is no way in hell we will ever run the servers with any type of Windows OS.  Never going to happen.

The "cloud" is more gimmick than substance.  Marketing seems to be doing its job.



EDIT:  Just as a side note.  I find it rather comical Microsoft is all about "cloud" computing today.  When "cloud" computing was first popular in the mid 80's, Microsoft made a major push towards businesses telling them shared computing environments were not the way to go.  Of course they said that because thier OS could not do it.  Finally, 25+ years later, they get around to implementing shared server support and they claim its the best thing since sliced bread and the masses fall in line.

Yes, my office, in the early 80's ran a 5 server farm (some days it was 6, sometimes it was 4, no one actually knew the exact count, from day to day, except me), which was completely transparent to the users.  They had a context sensitive visual shell to use as well.  You could copy and paste between applications as well, all on dumb terminals.

When it comes to shared computing, I have a pretty good handle on the environments it would really work well with.

[katanaso]

MS is pushing "Cloud" computing simply for added revenue.  We all know that.

They have the best marketing folks around, convincing business to outsource their infrastructure to them.

[mipoikel]

"Cloud" is much more than just microsoft.

[Skuzzy]

"Cloud" is much more than just microsoft.

Yes, but Microsoft is one of the major players pushing it.  You can get Linux based "cloud" services as well.  OS X too.

All manner of marketing in that area.

[Ack-Ack]

Would it be possible for AH to run on one of these services?   I've seen some games being played on it and whilst the technology is still being perfected it could open up some possibilities. 

This should eliminate any hardware deficiencies and maybe improve overall lag to the game server and reduce the round trip time by a few hops.

The inherent lag would make things difficult.  Look at the Onlive Service that you play the games off of a cloud server.  There is always a slight delay between inputs and what you see on the screen.  It's minimal but it is noticable and in multiplayer games, it will be a major hindrance.

ack-ack

[Vulcan]

The "cloud" is more gimmick than substance.  Marketing seems to be doing its job.

Yup, cloud has many physical issues 'marketing' will avoid talking about. Security and compliance are huge nightmares with cloud solutions. We have 1 significant client that went cloud and it's probably doubled to tripled their IT costs and complexity.

[DREDIOCK]

There is nothing to be gained (it will not reduce lag, it will add to it) and a lot ot risks involved (security and other issues).

On top of that, there is no way in hell we will ever run the servers with any type of Windows OS.  Never going to happen.

The "cloud" is more gimmick than substance.  Marketing seems to be doing its job.



EDIT:  Just as a side note.  I find it rather comical Microsoft is all about "cloud" computing today.  When "cloud" computing was first popular in the mid 80's, Microsoft made a major push towards businesses telling them shared computing environments were not the way to go.  Of course they said that because thier OS could not do it.  Finally, 25+ years later, they get around to implementing shared server support and they claim its the best thing since sliced bread and the masses fall in line.

Yes, my office, in the early 80's ran a 5 server farm (some days it was 6, sometimes it was 4, no one actually knew the exact count, from day to day, except me), which was completely transparent to the users.  They had a context sensitive visual shell to use as well.  You could copy and paste between applications as well, all on dumb terminals.

When it comes to shared computing, I have a pretty good handle on the environments it would really work well with.

And in the end if MS does what it usually does. It will claim having invented it. Kinda like with windows style OS and multitasking

[Bizman]

And in the end if MS does what it usually does. It will claim having invented it. Kinda like with windows style OS and multitasking

Whut??? Al Gore didn't invent it? 

[katanaso]

Whut??? Al Gore didn't invent it? 

No, but he did invent clouds...

[BoilerDown]

Depends what kind of cloud computing you're talking about.  For something like AH, its not going to offer any improvements.

For web hosting, it could be a good idea.  The web site owners can scale the services up or down easily based on sales or web traffic.  They don't have to buy extra servers in order to handle anticipated future loads, instead they can add or subtract service on the fly.

Using the cloud as an application server, and deploying thin or web clients is a horrible idea for most real applications beyond say word processing.  It will be a slow as the network its on, which is many orders of magnitude slower than actually having access to a local hard drive.  I would never, for example, want to use "the cloud" for video editing.

[Rob52240]

There is nothing to be gained (it will not reduce lag, it will add to it) and a lot ot risks involved (security and other issues).

On top of that, there is no way in hell we will ever run the servers with any type of Windows OS.  Never going to happen.

The "cloud" is more gimmick than substance.  Marketing seems to be doing its job.



EDIT:  Just as a side note.  I find it rather comical Microsoft is all about "cloud" computing today.  When "cloud" computing was first popular in the mid 80's, Microsoft made a major push towards businesses telling them shared computing environments were not the way to go.  Of course they said that because thier OS could not do it.  Finally, 25+ years later, they get around to implementing shared server support and they claim its the best thing since sliced bread and the masses fall in line.

Yes, my office, in the early 80's ran a 5 server farm (some days it was 6, sometimes it was 4, no one actually knew the exact count, from day to day, except me), which was completely transparent to the users.  They had a context sensitive visual shell to use as well.  You could copy and paste between applications as well, all on dumb terminals.

When it comes to shared computing, I have a pretty good handle on the environments it would really work well with.

+1

I prefer to own my information as well as store it on my own private property.

[4deck]

I can't believe were just now again getting into 64 bit computing, when I worked on Digital systems (DEC) we had 128 bit computing 15 years ago. Now, their like 64 bit is a great thing. LMFAO. 2 steps forward, 64 back. DOH!!