Cloud computing

[OneWorld]

I like the idea of Cloud Computing, although it's nothign new, I first heard of the concept about 20 years ago!

But I still canoot get my head around uploading files to the Cloud, is essentially no different to upload files to a website which a person might establish, and there are loads of free-hosting sites

Is it just the convenience of CC'ing that sets it apart and if that is the case, what's the difference between uploading to a cloud and uploading to one of the file hosting sites?

I have to say though having the Cloud icon on the Taskbar in Win7 is really useful, though I wasn't quick enough to get the free 25gig

[BJG145]

what's the difference between uploading to a cloud and uploading to one of the file hosting sites

Same thing, Cloud = Internet-based pretty much.

[Exalted Wombat]

Yes, it's only a buzz-word. Any storage accessed over a network could be called "cloud".

123-REG is currently making a big deal of their web hosting being "Cloud-based". You mean you don't actually OWN any hardware?

[James Perrett]

But I still canoot get my head around uploading files to the Cloud, is essentially no different to upload files to a website which a person might establish, and there are loads of free-hosting sites

FTP and NFS servers were around a long time before the web. I've been using 'cloud' servers for all my working life.

James.

[OneWorld]

what's the difference between uploading to a cloud and uploading to one of the file hosting sites

Same thing, Cloud = Internet-based pretty much.

That's what I thought myself. So if I carry around a USB stick, I could have a cloud in my pocket! But I notice that the 'Educational' version of Office 2013 is now just available for 4 years and they are encouraging people to sign up for the online Office365, giving the impression that Microsoft at least wants applications to run online, and we rent the software rather than buy it. In other words, computing will go full circle in so much there'll be servers and dumb terminals to replace the Desktop/Laptop/Tablet.

Could you imagine Cubase run from a cloud?

"Every dark cloud has a silver lining" Hmm am not so sure about that!

[Exalted Wombat]

Yes, that's the dark side of "cloud computing". Processing on line, as well as data storage. Not terribly practical, until EVERYONE has reliable, 24/7 'net access.

[twotoedsloth]

Renting software makes a lot of sense.

For example, at work I had a project of transferring old 1/2" tapes (15 ips no noise reduction) to CD (backed up on a hard drive). We bought the Waves Z-Noise plugin, but since that project, I haven't had a use for it. It would have been more cost-effective to rent a noise reduction plugin.

[Folderol]

Unless it's a one off situation or the software is eye-wateringly expensive then renting is never going to be cost effective.

Also you are extremely vulnerable to bait-and-switch tactics. You're on top-tier for lock-in, and also a prime data security target.

You can be shut down at no notice and lose any data not locally stored - as a certain Mr DotCom discovered.

If some contractor accidentally digs up your phone line while laying (yet another) gas pipe, you're out of action until BT deigns to repair the cable - and remembers to reset the exchange fuse.

Then on top of that you still have all the hardware issues you'd have with a full local system! There's not much benefit of a 5x9 uptime if your monitor goes pop just after PC world closes.

[twotoedsloth]

Well, in our case, we haven't had to use noise reduction software more since that project, you might call it a one-off, though it is possible we'll be doing more of these analog tape conversions in the future.

Just doing some simple math, the software was roughly $700, if you assume that is for one year, then you're talking about $1.92 a day, which is quite cost efficient, even if you had to rent the software for a two week period, or 90 day quarter, and so on.

[Madman_Greg]

It’s very much in its infancy. To most people at the moment it really is network accessible storage. To a lot of businesses it’s about accessing their business applications from anywhere with any device. Or say accessing application on demand services (ASP) instead of providing the appications themselves.

As a concept it’s about multiple functions being available in the cloud. From applications, computing power, storage, data etc…etc….. With the end user using a light weight computing device, and accessing these services through a browser, mobile device etc….

[Exalted Wombat]

Well, in our case, we haven't had to use noise reduction software more since that project, you might call it a one-off, though it is possible we'll be doing more of these analog tape conversions in the future.

Just doing some simple math, the software was roughly $700, if you assume that is for one year, then you're talking about twotoedsloth.92 a day, which is quite cost efficient, even if you had to rent the software for a two week period, or 90 day quarter, and so on.

You should have Googled "Rent Waves Plugin". Z-Noise is $838 for seven days, $125 for a month for the Native version. If you need TDM you have to rent a bundle, and they whack the price up.

I'd be very wary of archiving a NR'd version though. Store ALL the available information. Enthusiasm for processed sound tends to sour with experience (remember the disasters of early "remastering for CD"?) and there'll always be a better, more transparant system NR in the pipeline. Information once thrown away is gone for ever.

[Folderol]

Ok, time to get on my donkey (I'm too old for a high horse).

It's not in it's infancy. It is a reduced model of a client-server setup. The principles of which were well understood by the middle 1970s.

In a convention setup, the client loads a program and data from the server, works on the data (and may add locally sourced material) then saves the results to the server, possibly also sending print files. The only significant latencies you have are in fetching and saving. Security is reasonably manageable as everything is in-house.

With the cloud setup, you only fetch the data from the remote server and minimal browser I/O extensions. You now have latencies while any significant block of data is transferred back and forth. You have added latency from the internet itself, as even if the server is in the next town, the routing could just as easily go via Australia, as via a single hop. The ISPs that your data is going through may have traffic shaping policies that will slow down your work further. Also, you have dropped data packets - the TCP protocol will resend these but it's an added delay, and the more convoluted the route, the worse the situation gets.

You can no longer just hit 'print' and walk down stairs and fetch your job from the printer. If the program you're running is anything more than a trivial word processor, you now have to fetch large quantities of formatted output then pass it to your local printer.

All the bits of glue code in your browser are likely to be javascript, which is about as safe as a chocolate teapot. You are also routing information through totally unknown links. Encryption you say. Well, even SSL is under attack these days, and there have already been several cases where SSL certificates have been spoofed. You no longer own your data. It is owned by the government of the country where the server resides, and you have no idea who, or where they are.

Banks etc. do use client-server models, but they also use dedicated links, serious encryption, keep the programs on the local machines and the data on their own servers. They also have a lot of money to throw around.

Modern computers are so powerful that for most purposes the client-server model has no benefit at all. Also, if you really do want to access your stuff remotely, there is nothing stopping you having your own server, properly secured. You can't stop the most sophisticated attacks, but at least you know where your data is and have the means to recover it.

[BJG145]

Could you imagine Cubase run from a cloud?

I think it's quite possibly the way things will ultimately go. Personally I can't wait until we're back to the good old dumb terminal model.

Modern computers are so powerful that for most purposes the client-server model has no benefit at all.

With fast enough connection speeds, it's desktop computing that will have no benefit at all. Cloud computing has plenty benefits.

[Exalted Wombat]

With fast enough connection speeds, it's desktop computing that will have no benefit at all. Cloud computing has plenty benefits.

For the user, or the software seller?

Anyway, until everyone's internet connection is as reliable as their electricity supply (i.e. not quite 100%, but pretty darn near) it can't happen.

[twotoedsloth]

Yes... I should have Google'd "rent waves plugin". I'm curious why my salesperson didn't let me know of this option at the time, I am sure I asked him.

I could have even used the demo license for one week, as I needed it for just one afternoon, but I figured that would be dishonest.

[zenguitar]

OK... I am on BT Broadband, 8Mbit too. But all that means is that I share that bandwidth with up to 49 other households. Each of those households has a BT Home Hub that can accept 2 wired ethernet connections and many more wireless connections simultaneously.

So, picture your 'modern' household; dad has his 'work' machine in the office, there's a media centre in the living room, husband and wife both have laptops or iPads, kids have laptops, a few smartphones...

50 Home Hubs, each with 3 or 4 simultaneous connections, all sharing the same 8Meg pipe.

Now imagine how that's going to struggle when the kids have all their music and videos stored in the cloud, when the media centre with all those HD movies is up in the cloud, dad is working from home over the cloud... Four or five individuals in each household all streaming their data, largely data heavy media, all at the same time.

If everyone switched to cloud computing the entire internet would collapse within seconds. There ain't enough bandwidth. And that's before you even consider the implications of all your data sitting on someone else's computer.

I can see the theoretical benefits. But even then I would prefer a 'personal cloud'; MY data, on MY storage, in MY home, available to me everywhere via a seamless VPN, and with a back up on a VERY trusted site elsewhere.

Andy

[Martin Walker]

So if I carry around a USB stick, I could have a cloud in my pocket!

I like that concept OneWorld, I really do!

Martin

[Madman_Greg]

a few quickly written comments, so apologies for typos etc.....

I did not suggest that Cloud was anything new. In fact in sense the concept is like going back to old dumb / green screen terminals with everything accessible via the network and the device just being used for access, presentation and input.

Also for the cloud to be usable in terms of performance and availability then the internet services (mobile and static) we receive today are clearly not good enough.

A lot of companies have just jumped on the Cloud word band wagon for marketing and trying to be hip. That’s OK, because some of the services they are providing fit with the cloud concept, but tend to only deliver on one element – data storage. But from a concept perspective some of these services fit with the Cloud concept, of data any time, anywhere on using any device.

Cloud in its proper context is very attractive to the average home user. Imagine a thin client computer at home, a tablet, a smart phone, maybe your car. No need for devices running operating systems from disks, chip imbedded minimal operating systems on these devices configured for your service provider. For the average home user, who does browsing, email, word processing and may be a few games it’s very attractive. No more messing with windows, same services on any of your devices anywhere. And all the services you need provided via the Cloud.

Lots of other benefits, everything is hosted in proper data centres, power protection for the hosted infrastructure, redundancy, backup etc….

Data placement in terms of data protection and personal and sensitive information is a good point to make.

[Pete Kaine]

Think I fully agree with Folderol and his Donkey soap box preaching above.

That's what I thought myself. So if I carry around a USB stick, I could have a cloud in my pocket!

The correct term for that is a SneakerNet!

But I notice that the 'Educational' version of Office 2013 is now just available for 4 years and they are encouraging people to sign up for the online Office365, giving the impression that Microsoft at least wants applications to run online, and we rent the software rather than buy it.

Yep, they've been working towards this for years. An old but rather relevent article about one of their chief software architects can be found here : http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/16-12/ff_ozzie?...

It's almost 5 years old so some of the software has come and gone (Livemesh anyone) but it gives some background into the thought process.

Could you imagine Cubase run from a cloud?

Ohm Studio? OK perhaps it's not quite 100% cloud but they seem to be moving quite firmly in that direction.

Cloud in its proper context is very attractive to the average home user. Imagine a thin client computer at home, a tablet, a smart phone, maybe your car. No need for devices running operating systems from disks, chip imbedded minimal operating systems on these devices configured for your service provider. For the average home user, who does browsing, email, word processing and may be a few games it’s very attractive. No more messing with windows, same services on any of your devices anywhere. And all the services you need provided via the Cloud.

For the average user I do tend to agree.. hell we've already seen all this with iOS/Android/Chrome OS which are pretty much just cloud front ends. For the power user through and even businesses that require 100% secure uptime I'm really not convinced at this point and everytime I see a law enforcement arm try and demand unlimited and unrestricted access to a cloud based service or a story on national goverments fighting over just who owns the internet I get less and less convinced.

[Magic Matt]

Cloud computing.... I hate the way that infantile term has prevailed. It's only popular because idiots in marketing departments that were too thick to understand what "Server-side processing" was. They call it "Cloud" because when they drew diagrams on the board, the bit they didn't really understand (usually where the Internet was represented) was drawn as... yup, a cloud. [sigh]

What you need to understand about cloud computing is this...
Latency will NEVER be low enough to do anything real-time, music wise, with any degree of efficiency, compared to client-side processing.

Very very simple cloud processing test.
- Does the process require more computing power than I have available on my desktop client?
- Is the task suitable for multiple-computer processing?
- Do I mind waiting while the data is sent for processing, then received back, to save time in the actual computing?
- Is the risk of delay acceptable if the servers are already busy?

Recording music real-time into a DAW for most people *requires* low latency. There's not much by way of processing involved, it's down to the speed you can transfer data from one point in the system to another, so introducing anything that can add a delay is a complete non-starter. That alone makes it unsuitable for server-side processing.

Now when it comes to processing a filter - say for example pitch-shifting some audio non-real-time, maybe you could argue that you could save time sending the data to a server, having it processed, then bringing it back... but again, chances are you want it real time when getting your settings right.

The fact that cloud-based storage copies to your computer first for accessing, and doesn't store the data only in the cloud, tells you how poor it is for real-time applications. It's a convenient way to access your data from anywhere, but it's not a replacement for your hard drive.

If anyone can think of something that would be genuinely better, in a music production environment, being sent away for server-side processing, I'd love to know what it is.

[BJG145]

If anyone can think of something that would be genuinely better, in a music production environment, being sent away for server-side processing, I'd love to know what it is.

The advantage wouldn't be that you could sit in your studio and do something better. The advantage would be that you could fly to LA and pull up the project with all the same plugins and settings, plus all the other advantages that cloud computing provides; eg you don't lose your data if the hard drive crashes, and software updates could be rolled out without user intervention. At the moment it's hard to imagine the connection speeds, but it was hard to imagine TV before someone invented it. I don't expect full-blown cloud-based DAWs in the immediate future, but I think cloud computing will be a persistent trend. In business it's a PITA managing large networks; thin clients are vastly easier. And where business leads, the consumer will probably follow.

BTW "Cloud computing" is a much nicer phrase than "server-side processing".

[Goddard]

Maybe get in on the ground floor...

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bandlab/bandlab-music-creation-cloud

also:

http://www.ohmstudio.com/ (still in beta)

http://www.audiotool.com/app <why flash?)

http://soundation.com/ <arggh, another flash site!)

http://www.indabamusic.com/sessions (session console functionality lies within)

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/a ... t-0911.htm (bit dated now, maybe still of interest for profools)