Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam Citron who wrote (63596)	1/3/2006 1:24:53 PM
From: QwikSand	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 64865

Yeah, well... As far as I can see, we never had any discussion (at least, any interesting discussion as opposed to just braying) on this thread about whether Google's power bill was large. Obviously, it is large, and obviously they will take steps to control it. The question--at least to me--was mostly how it compares with Google's payroll. In Schwartz' interview, he said specifically that the power bill is "probably as large", whereas no matter how many servers they have, it really probably isn't. This doesn't mean the difference between the numbers is necessarily enormous. One can easily twiddle the parameters so a power bill with 100,000 servers, dozens of petabytes of storage, air conditioning, switching and so forth doesn't look vanishingly small next to a payroll with 5,000 employees. In any event, somehow we swung from the trivia question "does electricity cost equal payroll cost" all the way over to the idiotic assertion that electricity doesn't matter at all, which it obviously does. So we can continue to believe that Schwartz was right in his overall thrust about computing trends even if he got a little carried away with the specifics on the visual aids, and we can continue to hope that Sun has some new technologies to exploit those trends that will benefit shareholders in the near term. --QS