Author Archives: specialk

Can I have my money back Steve?

Leave a reply

Apparently a federal judge ruled that Apple violated anti-trust law and conspired to raise prices for e-books.

http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-apple-judge-conpiracy-20130710,0,3253817.story

For those of us who bought e-books, that is not a surprise. I remember when e-books cost 9.99 not 14.99.

All this proves is that large companies with infinite budgets will use their market power to screw over the consumer. And that things like the anti-trust act still add value.

Take that libertarians.

And I want my money back.

NetApp Did It – follow up to post on Facebook recovery codes

Leave a reply

One of my favorite South Park episodes of all time is “The Simpson’s did it”. In that episode the creators of South Park enumerate every stupid asinine plot device the Simpsons ever used.

In the tech industry in the 1990’s we had a saying “IBM did it”. In other words, no matter how great an idea you think you might have had, IBM had already done it.

So I was tremendously gratified when a buddy of mine pointed out that NetApp did it in response to the Xorbas paper.

Here’s the patent and the key elements of the paper:

 “Specifically, a single diagonal parity block is calculated across a series of row parity groups. Upon the failure of any data blocks, each in an independent row parity group, the invention enables recovery of the data blocks using local row parity. Upon the failure of any two blocks within a single parity group, the invention facilitates recovery using a combination of local row parity and global diagonal parity calculations. Advantageously, the present invention allows more efficient (and easier) recovery of single failures in an array configured to enable recovery from the concurrent failure of two storage devices (disks) within a sub-array of the array. “

The good news is that the all of the the patent claims are written in terms of row and diagonal parity, protecting against exactly two failures.

Intriguingly when NetApp was looking at this technology we were focused on how do you make disks more reliable. What makes the Xorbas work fascinating is that they focused on how to make bricks (disk+compute) more reliable.

One of the objections to bricks, at the time, was that it was a very expensive product given the cost and performance of disk, CPU and memory. That kind of architecture would make sense if the compute was significantly more intensive than just file system operations. Otherwise you were spending a lot of money to add a small amount of disks compared to adding a shelf.

And the reality is that Isilon wasn’t quite as big a success as NetApp feared.

As a modest reflection on the past, at the time, I remember folks wondering how we could bring compute closer to the disks. And we had these ideas about vmware and virtualization and missed this whole big data thing entirely.

What we really missed was that the database layer was going to change radically to a scaleout architecture where a clustered file system that made disk more cost-effective and reliability more cost-effective would be tremendously valuable.

But we didn’t. And I was there, involved in those discussions and I was as blind to the opportunity as anybody else.

We were too focused on disk drives, not on the changing nature of compute. And missed how our technology could apply to that changing nature of compute.

So like IBM, NetApp did it and someone else will capitalize on it.

 

 

Time to invent a file system

Leave a reply

In 2006, while at NetApp, I remember with horror the launch of Isilon.

Isilon’s product was everything Clustered ONTAP – aka GX – wanted to be.

One of the most intriguing aspects of the product was the use of Reed-Solomon codes to cut the amount of storage required. The downside, of course, was that rebuild was a bitch. The rebuild was so painful, that although the tech was interesting, our senior most architects were dismissive of the value.

They believed that the clustered storage solution and a clustered file system would deliver superior availability with better cost and faster rebuilds. Or something like that, I must admit that I have forgotten the details of the debates and don’t feel like pulling remembering everything.

The market failure of Reed Solomon codes, more or less convinced me that the right answer for the foreseeable future was 2x the storage costs.

And then I read this:

http://storagemojo.com/2013/06/21/facebooks-advanced-erasure-codes/

That is a nice summary of this paper: http://anrg.usc.edu/~maheswaran/Xorbas.pdf

This is a huge result. What it suggests is that storage availability is no longer tied  to 2x the storage infrastructure without taking an unacceptable hit on recovery.

A new file system that embraces this kind of encoding could be a good solution for a large class of applications that don’t need the RTO of 2x the storage. Making storage cheaper has always been a winning strategy for growing market share.

A new clustered file system built around this kind of erasure code or even a variety of erasure codes could be a significant new addition to the tech eco-system.

I wonder if something built ground up would look very different from adapting an existing system.

 

Starcraft II – Tactical depth

Leave a reply

Been playing a lot of Starcraft II. Long story, but I finally got a rig that can play at 60 FPS (there is something magical at 60 FPS)…

Obviously this game has ridiculous tactical and strategic depth for operational combat – a fixed theater with a fixed set of resources. Given the level of talent and expertise that is devoted to playing this game, could it be anything else.

What has been elusive, thus far, to me is that strategic and tactical depth. As a noob who hasn’t really played an RTS in almost 10 years, it’s interesting to see how the tactical depth reveals itself.

I’d share with folks what I’ve learned, but assume what an idiot noob discovers first, and you got what I’ve learned.

Impressive game starcraft ii, very impressive game.

 

 

Winning the long game, Microsoft, Nokia, and Windows 8.1

Leave a reply

2008_nov_windows_1_0The release of Windows 8.0 was a bold statement about the future that I agree with. The future of computing is touch screen devices with optional keyboards. And that an operating system that can make both work will win.

At some level, there is a large group of smart folks who disagree with the idea that the square can be circled, that the future is discrete distinct devices with keyboards dying a slow miserable death.

The challenge is that the majority of work is data entry. A keyboard is used for most data entry. And the most efficient typing device is a mechanical keyboard.

So the keyboard will continue to have a place in the market.

In this future, an operating system that allows both touch and keyboard data entry allows application developers to decrease their R&D. Instead of trying to build two distinct applications one for touch and for keyboard, they can think of touch and keyboard as two distinct views into their same underlying application.

And it is that reduction in R&D that will make keyboard + touch screen devices win out. If you make it more efficient to build  solutions, then the cheapest solutions to build tend to win out over the long term. And if you are Microsoft you can burn through cash to win in the long haul (BING!)

And that brings me to Windows 8.0. Windows 8.0 sucked and was awesome at the same time. Windows 8.0 was awesome because it absolutely nailed some of the frustrations around windows and app discovery and it definitely got me wishing for a touch screen on my laptop. Windows 8.0 was horrible because there were so many distinct usability flaws. For example, the fact you had to use the keyboard and the mouse to find an app, the annoyingly difficult ability to get the search icon, and I could go on.

Windows 8.1 is an incremental improvement.

And that got me thinking about Windows 1.0. I am certain when Steve Jobs saw Windows 1.0 he thought: nothing to fear here. And I am certain the UNIX guys saw Windows 1.0 and said: Nothing to see here. And then Windows 2.0 shipped, and still nothing changed. And then Windows 3.0 and it almost got usable. And then Windows 3.1 and the world finally tilted in Microsoft’s favor.

I have a strong belief in the value of incremental improvement winning out over magical product discovery. And Microsoft has always nailed incremental product improvement when they are moving in the right general direction.

The improvements in Windows 8.1 are noticeable. Is it a great product? No. But it took Microsoft 7 years to build Windows 3.1 and it took them 15 years to get to Windows XP – and that was the first version of the OS that actually worked.

So what can get in the way?

The real challenge for Microsoft is not that the path they are on is wrong. The real challenge is that from 1985 to 2000 Microsoft was the destination for the best and the brightest in the tech industry. The question is whether they can continue to attract the best and the brightest who can build that transformation…

Not dead yet.

In 2007 I bet that Nokia could figure out this iOS thing. And I was wrong. Nokia spectacularly failed to recognize the disruptive nature of iOS, sat on their lead and is now trying to tell us that they are not dead yet. I figured that with all of those resources, a competent CEO, a competent CTO and a strong technical team would seize the moment and realize like the British did with the Dreadnought that everything had suddenly changed and their lead had evaporated. And, without a shadow of a doubt, their CEO was incompetent and their technical team for all of Nokia’s incredible technical talent was unable to react to the iPhone.

Success or failure, ultimately is a function of being able to attract talent, point them in the right direction and have the ability to course correct over time. For Microsoft, the direction is right, the ability to course correct was demonstrated, now all that remains is whether they can attract and retain the talent to win.

 

Too hot for Starcraft II

Leave a reply

Unfortunately today’s heat wave precludes me playing starcraft ii. The heat generated from the fan, coupled with the heat in the house makes it impossible to play.

Edit – although if I played naked it might work. And put a bucket underneath to catch the sweat. And thanks to all of my training I have salt-tablets to deal with dehydration and a camelback to keep hydrated… Naked co-ed starcraft … Some things can never be unsaid or unseen. 

These shoes were made for filibustering, and that’s just what they’ll do

Leave a reply

2013-06-28_1205

 

Last week Wendy Davis wore these shoes for 13 hours to filibuster an end-run around women’s reproductive rights. Who would have known. I wonder if the minimalist dudes will chime in about how the extra padding of the shoes was the reason she needed a back-brace.

Minor rant. Texas cares so much about Women’s health that they have the highest percentage of people who have no medical insurance – about 1/3. And when the federal government tried to expand that percentage their governor refused to take part. Again, what was Lincoln thinking?

They care so much about Women’s health that they are forcing a special session of the legislature that violates all of their procedural processes just to get this law passed.

 

My next marathon is going to be done in these shoes.

Welcome to California – The Jews, the Bomb, Gay Rights, DOMA and the South

Leave a reply

In the 1930’s, the Nazi racial policies forced many Jews to leave Germany and head to the UK and the United States. Chief among those fugitives was a physicist named Albert Einstein.

Those refugees gave the USA a critical talent advantage at a critical juncture in world history.

Instead of the bomb being built-in Germany, it was built in the USA, and Adolf’s reign of horror ended after 12 not 1000 years.

The history of the world has been thus far, when you cause people to flee due to intolerance they go elsewhere and make the elsewhere better.

With the recent DOMA ruling, we are about to witness a similar migration of talent, and companies that hire talent away from places of intolerance.

It was delightful to read this article today. I especially loved this quote:

Bank of America is far from alone in grappling with the problem that some of its employees apparently have a powerful incentive to exit Texas that they didn’t have at the start of the week.

Texas has made hay about how corporate friendly they are, and they might be… But in a world where global talent competition is fierce, I want to be in a place where a gay man wants to live not in a place where a gay is denied the right to marry and all the rights that flow from that.

Companies will quickly realize that intolerant states are a bad place to be and will move fast.

Mark this day in history, it’s the day the intolerant south opted out of the 21st century.

And to all you folks who are looking for a place where you can get married and start a company, come to California…

.