Linux loving Microsoft

[millusions]

Read an article in Linux Format UK edition January 2015 how Microsoft is adopting Linux for their Azure cloud storage.
Purely to keep up with competition, Google and Amazon.
Who knows, it might lead to better things, I'm hoping they have a lightbulb moment 'oh, yes, centralised configuration for everything is not such a hot idea!'

but anyway,
yesterday had someone from US share a 5GB file with me, im in Australia, and they chose Microsoft OneDrive to upload it.
All is cool, wonderful technology of 2014, until i started downloading the thing.

OMG. I did a copy link of the file and dump to 'wget -c' in terminal of course.

the speeds were absolutely horrible. it rarely reached 50% of my bandwidth, hovering between 100kbps and 290kbps. it took more than 7 hours to download the file.
I watched the last gig crawl for 1 hour. It couldnt even maintain a steady flow, constant up and down. And I know my connection is pretty stable, i use ADSL1 profile because it synchs slightly faster for me than ADSL2. My max input is 700kbps and (on ADSL2 profile synchs at 650kbps). If there was any connection issues on my end i would know about it, well basically because im a nerd and if something is not 99.9% i will fix it Its a Cisco 887w router.

It amazed me how horrible the whole experience was using one of our technology giant's service. It was like a time capsule going back more than 10 years.

Now, I dont know if OneDrive is part of their Azure bullcrap, thus whether its Linux or not, but I feel like emailing Microsoft support and letting them know about Kubuntu Forums as a first step towards fixing their horrible OneDrive download speeds. So when you see them here make sure you make them feel welcome and dont make fun of windows.

[SteveRiley]

Read an article in Linux Format UK edition January 2015 how Microsoft is adopting Linux for their Azure cloud storage.

"Linux for their Azure storage"? That doesn't sound right.

General Azure storage is available as blobs (unstructured data), tables (NoSQL), files (SMB), and message queues. Also available are a managed Redis Cache service (via a Windows port maintained by Microsoft Open Technologies), a managed DocumentDB NoSQL service, and a managed SQL service.

Azure is very much a Windows infrastructure cloud. The physical hardware runs Windows Azure OS. Before 2012, this was a forked version of Windows Server 2008 that had some differences at the hypervisor. Today, it's stock Windows Server 2012. In fact, much of what appears in Windows Server is code that comes from Azure development.

You can learn quite a lot about Azure internals at a TechEd 2013 talk by Mark Russinovich, Microsoft Technical Fellow for Azure (and a good friend of mine). One thing to note -- Microsoft is much more willing to talk about how they build their cloud than either Google or Amazon. They deserve credit for this.

Purely to keep up with competition, Google and Amazon.
Who knows, it might lead to better things, I'm hoping they have a lightbulb moment 'oh, yes, centralised configuration for everything is not such a hot idea!'

What? All cloud providers offer varieties of storage. Azure is later to the game than Amazon Web Services, but they're also doing some interesting things that Amazon isn't yet -- particularly at the network level.

I don't understand your "centralized configuration" criticism. What does that have to do with storage?

but anyway,
yesterday had someone from US share a 5GB file with me, im in Australia, and they chose Microsoft OneDrive to upload it.
All is cool, wonderful technology of 2014, until i started downloading the thing.

OMG. I did a copy link of the file and dump to 'wget -c' in terminal of course.

the speeds were absolutely horrible. it rarely reached 50% of my bandwidth, hovering between 100kbps and 290kbps. it took more than 7 hours to download the file.
I watched the last gig crawl for 1 hour. It couldnt even maintain a steady flow, constant up and down. And I know my connection is pretty stable, i use ADSL1 profile because it synchs slightly faster for me than ADSL2. My max input is 700kbps and (on ADSL2 profile synchs at 650kbps). If there was any connection issues on my end i would know about it, well basically because im a nerd and if something is not 99.9% i will fix it Its a Cisco 887w router.

Hm. Even at a sustained 290 kbps, in 7 hours you would have downloaded 7,308,000 kilobits, or 892 megabytes. That's nowhere near 5 gigabytes. At your potential maximum 700 kbps throughput, 5 gigabytes = 41,943,040 kilobits would require 59,919 seconds = 16.6 hours. A 5 gigabyte file transferred in 7 hours represents a throughput of 1,664 kilobits per second. That "last gig for 1 hour" represents a throughput of 2,330 kilobits per second. Your numbers don't add up. ("kilo," "mega," and "giga" here are all 1024 in my computations.)

Now, I dont know if OneDrive is part of their Azure bullcrap, thus whether its Linux or not

OneDrive is hosted on Azure, yes. Microsoft is in the midst of moving all their online services to Azure data centers and cloud fabrics. Windows Server powers the infrastructure. A variety of Linux distributions is available for running Linux in virtual machines on Azure.

Azure is not bullcrap. Take some time to learn more about a service before you lob insults.

[millusions]

well. article below. if that doesnt sound right

I do like how you dismiss pretty much everything i'v said in this post.
the intention was purely informational with a touch of humour, but appears to be an ego challenge for you.

ok. so i meant kps not kbps, no need to pull the calculator out, the error was quite obvious.

ask your good friend why it took 7 hours to download a 5GB file that should download is less than 2.5 hour.
its utter bollocks regardless of how fancy they like to put.

its crap. i dread to have to use it ever again.

read the article.. Microsoft CEO says that 20% of Azure is Linux, so who do I believe here, probably not you, even thought i know your real name is Sheldon not Steve

[Qqmike]

Your post #3, millusions, sounds more "humorous" to me than the OP. Ha!

I do like how you dismiss pretty much everything i'v said in this post.
the intention was purely informational with a touch of humour, but appears to be an ego challenge for you.

Actually, I took your Post #1 seriously, also. I thought the response was quite informative. FWIW.

[GreyGeek]

Dittos, Qqmike. If ANYONE on this forum knows MS technology it is Steve. And, he's even handed and fair about discussing it. He's never set my BS meter off and if anyone on this forum dislikes MS business tactics more than I do they haven't proved it. There is a lot of mythology about MS software floating around the Linux community and Kubuntuforums.net benefits greatly by having Steve as an admin.
(P.S.- I know a lot about MS business, ethical and legal practices, which are another issues entirely.)

[SteveRiley]

well. article below. if that doesnt sound right
read the article.. Microsoft CEO says that 20% of Azure is Linux, so who do I believe here, probably not you

The article is correct. Your interpretation is wrong. "20% of virtual machines running on Azure use Linux" is not the same thing as "20% of Azure is built with hardware running Linux." The former statement, from the article, indicates that 20% of virtual machine guests started by customers are Linux. Your interpretation that this means some of the physical hosts supporting Azure are running Linux is just wrong. Furthermore, the article mentions nothing about Azure storage.

ok. so i meant kps not kbps, no need to pull the calculator out, the error was quite obvious.
ask your good friend why it took 7 hours to download a 5GB file that should download is less than 2.5 hour.

5 gigabytes in 2.5 hours represents a throughput of 4,660 kilobits per second = 582.5 kilobytes per second = 4.55 megabits per second. That's how fast your connection must be to achieve a 2.5 hour download.

its utter bollocks regardless of how fancy they like to put.
its crap. i dread to have to use it ever again.

Did you watch the video I linked to gain an understanding of Azure's technical architecture? I'm guessing not. Unless you actually invest the time learning about something as sophisticated as a major infrastructure and platform cloud service, you have no basis to launch a criticism.

I do like how you dismiss pretty much everything i'v said in this post.
the intention was purely informational with a touch of humour, but appears to be an ego challenge for you.

Because the "information" was wrong, and certainly not funny.