<!--quoteo(post=1703626:date=Mar 27 2009, 09:42 AM:name=dnleech)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dnleech @ Mar 27 2009, 09:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1703626"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->One word, virtualization. They will have extremely high end blade servers in rack after rack in a building that sits on a fibre line. Three server farms, east, central, west. Each server will have a blazing fast quad-core processor creating a virtual session of whatever type of console you can imagine and will dedicate processing power for each session for each user. So short answer, no there is not one piece of hardware per user (ridiculous thought). EDIT: I just wanted to point out that the above paragraph is speculation. It is only my assessment (probably inaccurate <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Even so, virtualization isn't free. There will be overhead associated with that as well. As far as I know, most virtualization systems still doesn't give you access to hardware like 3D cards so they would need to be virtualizing that as well.
<!--quoteo(post=1703626:date=Mar 27 2009, 12:42 PM:name=dnleech)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dnleech @ Mar 27 2009, 12:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1703626"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->One word, virtualization. They will have extremely high end blade servers in rack after rack in a building that sits on a fibre line. Three server farms, east, central, west. Each server will have a blazing fast quad-core processor creating a virtual session of whatever type of console you can imagine and will dedicate processing power for each session for each user. So short answer, no there is not one piece of hardware per user (ridiculous thought). EDIT: I just wanted to point out that the above paragraph is speculation. It is only my assessment (probably inaccurate <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm honestly not trying to be rude, but do you even know what virtualization is? Attempting to run the games in a virtual environment would cause it to run slower (virtualization has significant overhead). Since you mention a blade server I'm assuming you mean they will have multiple threads of the game running on one machine. A Blade server is not some magical PC that can run multiple copies of Crysis at the same time and remain playable. Also, it needs to output the video as well - it's not just processing client data like, for instance, a Counter-Strike server. I don't know of any PC setup that can play two games and output two separate video streams - but even if someone made a PC that could, it's highly doubtful that it would be able to run multiple copies of a high-end game and maintain a playable frame-rate.
This comment from the ShackNews review more-or-less sums up what I'm trying to say (you need to scroll down a little to get past the story):
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I remember reading an article about quantum experiment transferring information instantly to another quantum - over the speed of light.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> without trying to derail the thread... I think I know what you're talking about, however I distinctly remember the quantum teleportation thing involving the particle just disappearing at one position and reappearing at another, but it wasn't activated or controlled by anyone, it just happened... Plus who's to say it was the SAME particle, or if it was... did it even actually 'travel' if it used a worm-hole of sorts, then it still hasn't traveled faster than light, it traveled slower than light but the distance was 0. Lol.
and considering with quantum mechanics it's possible for absolutely anything to happen, I wouldn't pin any hope onto the idea.
DNA computing on the otherhand (but has nothing to do with internet or data-transfer)
If this lives up to its claims (in terms of frame rates on real world bandwidth) and if its economic. Im very excited about this. I need to replace me PC sooner rather than later a system like onlive could change my mind.
However i dont see how they can provide such a service for cheap. I wouldnt be willing to pay much more than £10-20 a month for this and i expect if its subscription it will be more. If you just pay fot the box thingy and then per game then that may be different, but i fail too see how they could run a business model on that, unless the games were expensive, and so was the box.
Comments
Even so, virtualization isn't free. There will be overhead associated with that as well. As far as I know, most virtualization systems still doesn't give you access to hardware like 3D cards so they would need to be virtualizing that as well.
I'm honestly not trying to be rude, but do you even know what virtualization is? Attempting to run the games in a virtual environment would cause it to run slower (virtualization has significant overhead). Since you mention a blade server I'm assuming you mean they will have multiple threads of the game running on one machine. A Blade server is not some magical PC that can run multiple copies of Crysis at the same time and remain playable. Also, it needs to output the video as well - it's not just processing client data like, for instance, a Counter-Strike server. I don't know of any PC setup that can play two games and output two separate video streams - but even if someone made a PC that could, it's highly doubtful that it would be able to run multiple copies of a high-end game and maintain a playable frame-rate.
This comment from the ShackNews review more-or-less sums up what I'm trying to say (you need to scroll down a little to get past the story):
<a href="http://www.shacknews.com/laryn.x?id=19522379#itemanchor_19522379" target="_blank">http://www.shacknews.com/laryn.x?id=195223...anchor_19522379</a>
Edit: Here's a better article by EuroGamer summing up the impossibility of this service:
<a href="http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/gdc-why-onlive-cant-possibly-work-article" target="_blank">http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/gdc-why-...ly-work-article</a>
without trying to derail the thread... I think I know what you're talking about, however I distinctly remember the quantum teleportation thing involving the particle just disappearing at one position and reappearing at another, but it wasn't activated or controlled by anyone, it just happened...
Plus who's to say it was the SAME particle,
or if it was... did it even actually 'travel'
if it used a worm-hole of sorts, then it still hasn't traveled faster than light, it traveled slower than light but the distance was 0. Lol.
and considering with quantum mechanics it's possible for absolutely anything to happen, I wouldn't pin any hope onto the idea.
DNA computing on the otherhand (but has nothing to do with internet or data-transfer)
However i dont see how they can provide such a service for cheap. I wouldnt be willing to pay much more than £10-20 a month for this and i expect if its subscription it will be more. If you just pay fot the box thingy and then per game then that may be different, but i fail too see how they could run a business model on that, unless the games were expensive, and so was the box.
<a href="http://www.onlive.com/aprilfools" target="_blank">http://www.onlive.com/aprilfools</a>