So who pays for Data Centers? And Why?

Quote: Fleastiff

Sears is converting old auto service buildings in shopping centers to Data Centers.

My brother tells me the data center that he uses in Suwanee GA used to be a Sears distribution center.

Quote: Pacomartin

My brother tells me the data center that he uses in Suwanee GA used to be a Sears distribution center.

Yes. Data Centers used to market their safety attributes such as being in a hardened remote location but companies want their data centers to be relatively close rather than buried in a missle silo in the sticks. Also, techie types usually like urban areas for keeping sharp on their technical skills, there not being many techie types near abandoned missle silos.

But I've been looking at the internet and seeking a niche that could be profitable. I thought perhaps of providing a mirror site for "X" and then trawling user data for fun and profit. I've thought of a data center that would be small. I thought of being part of the cloud but I can't see where the money would come from.

New term coined: "Server Hugger"... means a computer user who clings to ancient notions of having his own server rather than just a keyboard and screen that are connected to the cloud.

Down with tree huggers may not be the next Silicon Valley slogan but who knows? Perhaps the cloud will win in the end because it is too ephemeral a target to attack?

Quote: Fleastiff

New term coined: "Server Hugger"...

Server huggers are afraid that the internet will become full.


Forbes made an intersting observation. A recent study says that the Chromebook platform has reached 9.6% share in North American business and institutions, and 21% of the associated notebook sales market.
But there is no corresponding uptick in usage by the Chrome operating system.

It looks like IT departments are purchasing Chromebooks for the employees because they are very inexpensive, but that people aren't using them.

So here is the best, cheapest, easiest to learn ... (computer, mousetrap, whatever).... yet its rejected by the consumer not because of lack of excellence but because its learning curve, however modest, is just one straw too many. The item is not seen as sufficiently "super duper" and therefore its just one more frustration rather than one more opportunity for advancement. Its better, it may even be the best, but its not better enough to warrant attention.

Quote: Fleastiff

So here is the best, cheapest, easiest to learn ... (computer, mousetrap, whatever).... yet its rejected by the consumer not because of lack of excellence but because its learning curve, however modest, is just one straw too many. The item is not seen as sufficiently "super duper" and therefore its just one more frustration rather than one more opportunity for advancement. Its better, it may even be the best, but its not better enough to warrant attention.

The "better" product often loses, ask Sony.

Quote: AZDuffman

The "better" product often loses, ask Sony.

Yeah, or the QWERTY keyboard versos the DVORAK keyboard.
Or Gobbout's Basic and Bill Gate's Basic.

Quote: Fleastiff

Yeah, or the QWERTY keyboard versos the DVORAK keyboard.

QWERTY was designed to make you type s-l-o-w-e-r. Worse was better pre-element ball.

Quote: AZDuffman

QWERTY was designed to make you type s-l-o-w-e-r. Worse was better pre-element ball.

Not to make you type slower... to type alternating sides, so that the strikers didn't jam together, thus less stoppages, so overall faster. Less haste, more speed.

Quote: TheCesspit

Not to make you type slower... to type alternating sides, so that the strikers didn't jam together, thus less stoppages, so overall faster. Less haste, more speed.

My sources always said to slow things down so the strikers would not jam. Additionally they wanted "TYPEWRITER" all on the top row. Either way it is to make the strikers not jam, not for user ease.