The old Microsoft strategy of "embrace, extend, and extinguish" is just not going to fly in the snooty high performance computing market. Microsoft needs partners and Windows needs to coexist with Linux if the company wants to get anything more than a token share of real HPC work, which is why the company is talking up its …
"there is not really a good technical reason why the vast majority of x64-clusters running Linux could not be converted from static Linux machines to dynamic Linux-Windows images"
Rather than look for technical reasons why Windaz ia not on HPC clusters, perhaps we should be pondering what a HPC cluster user has to gain from putting Windaz on HPC clusters.
If the answer is "nothing" then what exactly is the point?
I have no idea how MS licensing works for their so-called "Windows HPC server" (or whatever it's called) but even if they don't hit you with per core licensing you can bet your bottom dollar that MS stands to make a bucket load of cash from a 64K Core HPC cluster. Or to put it another way, the owner of the HPC cluster will have to give a bucketload of cash to Microsoft.
So again, I ask you, what possible benefit could a HPC cluster operator gain in return for that bucketload of cash?
Maybe they really want to code their stuff in VB.NET or something.
- +Analysis Microsoft: We're making ONE TRUE WINDOWS to rule us all
- Climate: 'An excuse for tax hikes', scientists 'don't know what they're talking about'
- Apple: We'll unleash OS X Yosemite beta on the MASSES on 24 July
- Pics It's Google HQ - the British one: Reg man snaps covert shots INSIDE London offices
- White? Male? You work in tech? Let us guess ... Twitter? We KNEW it!