Skip to main content

iSuppli Report: Blade Servers to sell like pancakes!






The blade server is a very young technology, tracing its roots back only six years. To fulfill the needs of dot-com technology providers, Houston-based RLX Technologies—now part of Hewlett-Packard Co.—shipped the first blade server in March 2001. Due to disappointing sales, a number of vendors did not refresh their initial blade server product lines. However, Hewlett-Packard and IBM continued to introduce new generations of blade server products that were increasingly suitable for enterprise clients. As the blade server platform began to gain traction, Dell Inc. and Sun Microsystems Inc. rejoined the market at the end of 2006.

iSuppli defines the blade as a modular server based on a single motherboard incorporating microprocessor(s), memory and network interface. However, the blade may omit a number of components in order to free up space and to reduce power consumption, along with other considerations. The result is a server platform that when combined with other blades, can be physically arranged in an extremely dense way.


Check out iSuppli here.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Security: VMware Workstation 6 vulnerability

vulnerable software: VMware Workstation 6.0 for Windows, possible some other VMware products as well type of vulnerability: DoS, potential privilege escalation I found a vulnerability in VMware Workstation 6.0 which allows an unprivileged user in the host OS to crash the system and potentially run arbitrary code with kernel privileges. The issue is in the vmstor-60 driver, which is supposed to mount VMware images within the host OS. When sending the IOCTL code FsSetVoleInformation with subcode FsSetFileInformation with a large buffer and underreporting its size to at max 1024 bytes, it will underrun and potentially execute arbitrary code. Security focus
Post a Comment
Read more

OS Virtualization comparison: Parallels' Virtuozzo vs the rest

Virtuozzo's main differentiators versus hypervisors center on overhead, virtualization flexibility, administration and cost. Virtuozzo requires significantly less overhead than hypervisor solutions, generally in the range of 1% to 5% compared with 7% to 25% for most hypervisors, leaving more of the system available to run user workloads. Customers can also virtualize a wider range of applications using Virtuozzo, including transactional databases, which often suffer from performance problems when used with hypervisors. On the administration side, customers need to manage, maintain and secure just a single OS instance, while the hypervisor model requires customers to manage many OS instances. Of course, the hypervisor vendors have worked hard to automate much of this process, but it still requires more effort to manage and maintain multiple operating systems than a single instance. Finally, OS virtualization with Virtuozzo has a lower list price than the leading hypervisor for comme...
Post a Comment
Read more