I thought I would respond by having a current customer respond:
Jay, clearly this "president of a tech company" is part of the obsolete, data center centric guys we meet every day and he misses the point entirely.
We brought in Fractal for our billing system. We were told by IBM the cost of a new system, which we needed was around $4 million to $7 million and would take 18 - 24 months.
Using Fractal, we had it fully operational in 23 days and we eliminated the need to expand the data center for it.
Your comment from the dinosaur gets into disaster recovery too.
Again, he has a 1980s mind set - and he is clearly not a critical thinker.
Restart recovery, disaster recovery - in a 100% distributed system like Fractal is a different concept.
We run Fractal in 3 concurrent systems - that means we run 3 copies of our billing system, 24/7 with less than 30 seconds of downtime a year.
If any Fractal system has a problem, the others immediately replace it. There is nothing we did with current tech in disaster recovery that comes close to what we do with Fractal.
More interesting is the "costs are minimal" comment.
Clearly this person is a low tech CEO - because in one Fractal system - just our billing system, we saved over $4 million on development, and we were able to run it without using the data center, and when we retire the current billing system, the savings will exceed $8 million.
The yearly savings are over $3 million for DevOps - which we no longer need, and maintenance, and we eliminated Oracle and VMware and a lot of other software.
So do not spend time with dinosaurs, focus on people who have deep technology backgrounds and can use Fractal as it is intended.
The “need’ for datacenters will allows be a “thing”. Maybe not as much as it was/is now. But still they are required for almost all large to medium sized businesses.
Just because this or similar software runs of computers, smartphones or whatever.
Datacenters house all the technology that drives the devices that run this software/application.
Yes, for enterprise level computing needs, it makes sense. It would save a lot of money on electricity.
In the near future, when quantum computing really takes off, there may be a significant reduction in the number of servers required to run a business.
But it’s hard to beat a datacenter that can provide enough electricity, superfast internet, with redundant power/internet and physical security.
thanks for the reply. i'll see if i can find it. I assumed there was more to it than he was aware of but I'm not a techie so i couldn't rerspond. The discussion started around the construction of facilities for these massive data centers. i stated that i would not hang my hat on that because of the technology you're promoting. in otherwords those data centers would turn out to be a bad investment.
I shared your post with the president of a tech company I know and got this response:
Yes. The concept/use has been around since 1980’s. Mainly for the purpose of saving energy for large enterprise level companies.
It is mainly used for running certain applications. The “distribution” between computers is essential; it requires computers to share the load in a peer-to-peer environment.
In this scenario, a company would need to backup all the computers in their network for a disaster recovery situation.
Since XXXXXXX houses their servers at their office, the costs are minimal.
Just follow us here. We are having huge success commercially and the Fractal future is assured. We are doing weekly updates so I hope you like them.
I thought I would respond by having a current customer respond:
Jay, clearly this "president of a tech company" is part of the obsolete, data center centric guys we meet every day and he misses the point entirely.
We brought in Fractal for our billing system. We were told by IBM the cost of a new system, which we needed was around $4 million to $7 million and would take 18 - 24 months.
Using Fractal, we had it fully operational in 23 days and we eliminated the need to expand the data center for it.
Your comment from the dinosaur gets into disaster recovery too.
Again, he has a 1980s mind set - and he is clearly not a critical thinker.
Restart recovery, disaster recovery - in a 100% distributed system like Fractal is a different concept.
We run Fractal in 3 concurrent systems - that means we run 3 copies of our billing system, 24/7 with less than 30 seconds of downtime a year.
If any Fractal system has a problem, the others immediately replace it. There is nothing we did with current tech in disaster recovery that comes close to what we do with Fractal.
More interesting is the "costs are minimal" comment.
Clearly this person is a low tech CEO - because in one Fractal system - just our billing system, we saved over $4 million on development, and we were able to run it without using the data center, and when we retire the current billing system, the savings will exceed $8 million.
The yearly savings are over $3 million for DevOps - which we no longer need, and maintenance, and we eliminated Oracle and VMware and a lot of other software.
So do not spend time with dinosaurs, focus on people who have deep technology backgrounds and can use Fractal as it is intended.
he responded:
The “need’ for datacenters will allows be a “thing”. Maybe not as much as it was/is now. But still they are required for almost all large to medium sized businesses.
Just because this or similar software runs of computers, smartphones or whatever.
Datacenters house all the technology that drives the devices that run this software/application.
Yes, for enterprise level computing needs, it makes sense. It would save a lot of money on electricity.
In the near future, when quantum computing really takes off, there may be a significant reduction in the number of servers required to run a business.
But it’s hard to beat a datacenter that can provide enough electricity, superfast internet, with redundant power/internet and physical security.
I'm cheering for you. But my voice is but a whisper, lost in a hurricane.
Why hasn’t DOGE considered using using this tool?
Especially the graphics feature for tracking NGO money from one organization to another, as well as people’s names…
To my experienced eye, it’s a “no-brainer”…
Them, just maybe, we might be able to start seeing some arrests!
thanks for the reply. i'll see if i can find it. I assumed there was more to it than he was aware of but I'm not a techie so i couldn't rerspond. The discussion started around the construction of facilities for these massive data centers. i stated that i would not hang my hat on that because of the technology you're promoting. in otherwords those data centers would turn out to be a bad investment.
I shared your post with the president of a tech company I know and got this response:
Yes. The concept/use has been around since 1980’s. Mainly for the purpose of saving energy for large enterprise level companies.
It is mainly used for running certain applications. The “distribution” between computers is essential; it requires computers to share the load in a peer-to-peer environment.
In this scenario, a company would need to backup all the computers in their network for a disaster recovery situation.
Since XXXXXXX houses their servers at their office, the costs are minimal.
Hey George, tell your dinosaur friend to read the post from a current customer and maybe he ought to learn why his tech stack is obsolete.