>On 19 November, ARM, alongside Cisco Systems, Dell, Intel, Microsoft, and Princeton University, founded the OpenFog Consortium, to promote interests and development in fog computing.
Have we gone too far?
Fog :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
>Fog
so that's cloud services marketed for other cloud services?
>>56676844
no, it's a local mini cloud used by devices in it's proximity
it tries to provide the cloud services within it's computational capabilites, resorting to the cloud servers when it cannot
Is fog really the best marketing term they could come up with?
>>56676898
well, if they called it cloudlet people would start yelling
CLOUDLET FOR MANLETS
>CLOUDLET FOR MANLETS
CLOUDLET FOR MANLETS
in every comment section and soon the memes would kill the idea
why dont they just say server/mainframe?
>>56676929
because that's not how it works
Im well ahead of them. Raindrop computing is the best.
>>56676929
Because muh cloud.
>>56676940
>because that's not how it works
That's exactly how it works you dork. Fog is a marketing buzzword nothing more.
>2013
>not smog computing
>>56676972
>smug computing
>>56676977
>2016
>still no cluster of frog meme servers
So basically decentralization and/or specialization of cloud services for certain tasks?
Seems interesting, but still:
There is no cloud, just other people's servers.
>>56676891
Oh, so it pretty much just delegates most of the work to edge devices.
Sounds like this equals more end-user devices
>>56676988
>There is no cloud, just other people's servers.
There are no servers, just computers
>>56676781
The Cloud
|
Farts in the sky
|
Devices
They couldn't come up with something more fancy? Isn't fog just ground level ozone?
I don't fucking get this.
They all mean the same thing- someone else's server.
Why the fuck would you come up with a buzzword to confuse people when a perfectly good word already exists to describe the exact same thing? Is this some sort of Jewish HR/PR meme?