who's "clouded" what services?

[timbo343]

, haha, oh progresso! We had loads of discussions about this at meetings of network managers in the past. With us using SIMS too, just not great on a LAN.

[themightymrp]

I'm trying to work out if that was sarcasm or agreeing with me? Of course I see the benefits of running things from the cloud in terms or resource usage, but if (and when) our internet connection takes a nose dive, where does all of our registration information/reports/contact details etc go? Being in the cloud is fine - as long as you can guarantee 100% internet uptime. We can't

[CyberNerd]

I agree with the sentiment, but 50 times more resources is utter BS. We run stacks of apps over HTML5 and it just doesn't use anything like that.

I'm sure you COULD configure an app to use 50 x the resources, but you'd be doing it wrong.

Edited March 18, 2016 by elsiegee40

[timbo343]

I'm trying to work out if that was sarcasm or agreeing with me? Of course I see the benefits of running things from the cloud in terms or resource usage, but if (and when) our internet connection takes a nose dive, where does all of our registration information/reports/contact details etc go? Being in the cloud is fine - as long as you can guarantee 100% internet uptime. We can't

 

Exactly the same thinking as me. Also, what's the cost of a 100mb pipe into the school? I know a school who has gone all ipad 1:1 and they are thinking of installing a second 200mb line as they are peaking the first one. This is something that has got my back up about the MS stuff moving to cloud. If they [MS] can guarantee 100% or 99.99999% always on connection with redundancy for a cheap price, ill gladly look at moving to cloud for some bits but until then im waiting for that to happen.

 

I guess its a bit like when electric came about - we now take it for granted but i guess in the early days things were always going off.

 

I saw a picture of the Gartner evolution curve last nigth at a seminar http://d152j5tfobgaot.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Gartner1.jpg which was interesting to look at. It shows the Speech Recognition has been out for ages and we are just starting to use it in everyday life now.

[Bromcom-PR]

I'm trying to work out if that was sarcasm or agreeing with me? Of course I see the benefits of running things from the cloud in terms or resource usage, but if (and when) our internet connection takes a nose dive, where does all of our registration information/reports/contact details etc go? Being in the cloud is fine - as long as you can guarantee 100% internet uptime. We can't

 

No sarcasm meant at all.

 

You may not find 100% guaranteed SLA but with 99.9% SLA your service should not be down for more than a total of about 43.2 minutes in a month. Same concern applies to all other services relying on Internet in the schools besides MIS.

[Bromcom-PR]

I agree with the sentiment, but 50 times more resources is utter BS. We run stacks of apps over HTML5 and it just doesn't use anything like that.

I'm sure you COULD configure an app to use 50 x the resources, but you'd be doing it wrong.

 

It will be interesting to see how your "workaround" will overcome a desktop Windows application demanding for each user session say 250MByte RAM vs browser only 5Mbyte.

Edited March 18, 2016 by elsiegee40

[CyberNerd]

It will be interesting to see how your "workaround" will overcome a desktop Windows application demanding for each user session say 250MByte RAM vs browser only 5Mbyte.

 

I agree that windows handles remote session terribly; linux/unix machines do a much better job of this.

Even on Windows, a citrix session is currently (i'm reading off the screen) using 32MB RAM plus the application: hardly 250MB yet a single spreadsheet in the browser is using 210MB. Like I said - I agree entirely with your sentiment that "proper" SaaS is the way forward; but I think you are using the wrong arguments. IMO the best arguments are being able to use tools such as Hadoop with SaaS and the extortionate licensing costs of RDP/Citrix not that one might use a few MB over the other.

Edited March 18, 2016 by elsiegee40

[Bromcom-PR]

I agree that windows handles remote session terribly; linux/unix machines do a much better job of this.

Even on Windows, a citrix session is currently (i'm reading off the screen) using 32MB RAM plus the application: hardly 250MB yet a single spreadsheet in the browser is using 210MB. Like I said - I agree entirely with your sentiment that "proper" SaaS is the way forward; but I think you are using the wrong arguments. IMO the best arguments are being able to use tools such as Hadoop with SaaS and the extortionate licensing costs of RDP/Citrix not that one might use a few MB over the other.

 

We need to compare like with like. Open 10 user session running desktop MIS and check memory consumption. Do the same with browser based MIS and compare memory consumption. Happy to provide access to browser based MIS if you do not have any.

[CyberNerd]

We need to compare like with like. Open 10 user session running desktop MIS and check memory consumption. Do the same with browser based MIS and compare memory consumption. Happy to provide access to browser based MIS if you do not have any.

 

 

 

I can't open 10 sessions in the same browser. Here's one SIMS session running entirely in a browser. Chrome says it is using 91MB.

]

 

The point really is that it costs in Citrix licensing and in RDP licenses to do this. It is a stop gap.

[Bromcom-PR]

I can't open 10 sessions in the same browser. Here's one SIMS session running entirely in a browser. Chrome says it is using 91MB.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]35044[/ATTACH]]

 

The point really is that it costs in Citrix licensing and in RDP licenses to do this. It is a stop gap.

 

I see where we are talking cross purpose.

 

RAM memory I am referring to is at the backend on the server 'hosting the Windows session'.

 

Therefore for desktop MIS software for remote hosting you need:

1. 250 Mbyte Ram for each concurrent user session (instead of 5Mbyte) and associated extra processing, power, cooling and space etc..

2. You need Citrix licensing for each user session

3. You need RDP licenses for each user session

[CyberNerd]

 

Therefore for desktop MIS software for remote hosting you need:

1. 250 Mbyte Ram for each concurrent user session (instead of 5Mbyte) and associated extra processing, power, cooling and space etc..

2. You need Citrix licensing for each user session

3. You need RDP licenses for each user session

 

On our servers we're using 80MB for the app AND 32MB for the ancillary desktop services (you don't need to run a full desktop if you stream the app). It's more like 115MB, not close to 250Mb and certainly not 50 times. When a server has 32GB RAM: 115MB for a user session isn't going to break the bank and is very small beer compared to points 2 and 3. IF your running it for multiple sites and have thousands of users then sure you need webapps spread over multiple nodes; which is why Capita's "hosted" method is completely retarded. But saying to schools that you'll use 50 times the resources if you self host isn't true either.

[Bromcom-PR]

On our servers we're using 80MB for the app AND 32MB for the ancillary desktop services (you don't need to run a full desktop if you stream the app). It's more like 115MB, not close to 250Mb and certainly not 50 times. When a server has 32GB RAM: 115MB for a user session isn't going to break the bank and is very small beer compared to points 2 and 3. IF your running it for multiple sites and have thousands of users then sure you need webapps spread over multiple nodes; which is why Capita's "hosted" method is completely retarded. But saying to schools that you'll use 50 times the resources if you self host isn't true either.

 

I assume streaming will need extra component and extra licence?

 

We now agree on more points than ones we disagree. For clarity we have been saying "up to" 50 fold less RAM and then proportionate processing, power, cooling and space.

 

"IF your running it for multiple sites and have thousands of users then sure you need webapps ... "

 

Exactly! Specifically LAs and MATs are more and more looking for centrally hosted solution and the economy of scale makes it a very attractive with Web based App MIS rather than desktop Windows based App MIS.

 

For instance ARK MAT recently has chosen to go with only WebApp MIS solutions for replacing all of its academies desktop WindowsApp based MIS.

Edited February 11, 2016 by Bromcom-PR
typ

[russdev]

Interesting I was just reading this on Microsoft Blog and South Lee School. It discusses moving servers to the cloud..

 

 

‘Towards the Serverless School’ – Gerald Haigh looks at Azure in action at South Lee School - Microsoft UK Schools blog - Site Home - MSDN Blogs

 

Russ

[Achandler]

Ignoring the obvious bias of the article (its done by a company charging people to move to the cloud). Please note the above school is a independent Primary School, and not a secondary which it never states in the article. They still use on-site servers to play DVDs.... assuming there connection isn't good enough to stream them.

 

The cost saving are also dubious, and re-using the server room for teaching and learning (despite still having servers on site) as a benefit seems a little far fetched in most schools.

[russdev]

To be fair the article is written by Gerald Haigh who is freelance journalist hired by Microsoft but take your point ...

 

Russell

Edited February 12, 2016 by russdev

[nathan]

Does this scare anyone?

 

“We have not had to purchase any network servers. Based on evidence from other schools, we considered that we would probably have had to take on a full-time technician to support the network infrastructure had we not gone for the Cloud-based solution.”

[Boredguy]

I also liked the point in the article where they planned on a dedicated broadband connection just for the Azure... lets see, £6k to £10k per year as an estimate for a 100mb circuit... maybe a couple of local Hyper-V servers could have been cheaper, but if the solution is working for them that's great.

[PotNoodleTech]

Does this scare anyone?

 

“We have not had to purchase any network servers. Based on evidence from other schools, we considered that we would probably have had to take on a full-time technician to support the network infrastructure had we not gone for the Cloud-based solution.”

 

"I.T. Support

Mr Richard Bradbury HND Electronic Engineering "

[HPlum78]

Go hyperconverged. Or cloud. Or whatever. You won't save on hardware • The Register

 

That's not to say using cloudy based solution's should not be considered as I think that the cloud has its advantages used in the right way but if you need compute and storage on mass the cloud may be just as costly as hosting your own!

[CyberNerd]

 

“We have not had to purchase any network servers. Based on evidence from other schools, we considered that we would probably have had to take on a full-time technician to support the network infrastructure had we not gone for the Cloud-based solution.”

 

Surely the network infrastructure is now MORE important that ever ???

 

Anyway, for a tiny independent with less than 300 kids, I'm surprised they even need a single full time tech. cloud or not.

Even if all servers are cloud based it doesn't lessen the technician load if you are still running local windows apps, the maintenance still needs to be done. The thing that dramatically reduces the technician workload is the cloud based apps with no local install and no local operating systems to worry about. This isn't something azure really addresses.

[nathan]

Surely the network infrastructure is now MORE important that ever ???

 

Anyway, for a tiny independent with less than 300 kids, I'm surprised they even need a single full time tech. cloud or not.

Even if all servers are cloud based it doesn't lessen the technician load if you are still running local windows apps, the maintenance still needs to be done. The thing that dramatically reduces the technician workload is the cloud based apps with no local install and no local operating systems to worry about. This isn't something azure really addresses.

 

I would presume the infrastructure is still just as important as it was before, doesn't matter if you are cloud, local or hybrid. If your infrastructure goes down, your services are going to go down.

 

I agree with a lot of posts on here, that cloud hosting isn't going to be some magical thing. But i do think we'll start to move certain services up to the cloud.

[nathan]

I also liked the point in the article where they planned on a dedicated broadband connection just for the Azure... lets see, £6k to £10k per year as an estimate for a 100mb circuit... maybe a couple of local Hyper-V servers could have been cheaper, but if the solution is working for them that's great.

 

i wonder if they meant to azure express route, not 100% sure really. As has been mentioned before the article is a bit of an advertisement. 100mb circuits are a bit cheaper than that, we've just been quoted for £4600pa (of course location dependent).

 

If broadband prices drop to something like £3000pa for a 100mb leased line and Microsoft drop the prices for azure i can see cloud hosting taking off.

[PotNoodleTech]

£4600pa for 100mb is great!

[ellsandell]

£4600pa for 100mb is great!

I agree, when we switched providers last year at a previous job (Lake District), best we could get was around £6,600. 100Mb (with FTTC backup) slight cheaper without.

[nathan]

Prices seem to be coming down all the time which is great, hoping the ofcom ruling will mean we should see cheaper pricing in the next year or so too.