Oxide is the definition of vendor lock in. All of their hardware is unique... even down to the choice of fans. Fan burns out? Now you've got to buy another one... from them.
One of the amazing shifts in the last 20 years was realizing that commodity hardware, when deployed correctly, could do the job.
Not sure if we're talking metaphorical fans or literal ones but assuming the latter: replacement is covered under warranty. And for me personally, the "amazing shift" that you describe was in fact a decade-long experiment that left me with an inescapable conclusion: commodity hardware cannot, in fact, do the job -- and not for lack of trying!
Metaphorical fans, but also fans, and everything else. It was an example from the blog post. I looked at that super innovative and cool backplane. Sure, warranty covers it for the first N years, but then what? What happens when things turn into a Tesla situation and you get horror stories of delays and poor results?
I think 'commodity' is generalized at this point. Given the choice of Supermicro and Oxide. I'm going to pick Supermicro. They can deliver me a clean rack of machines too. Why would I go with Supermicro? Big company, lots of products, lots of choices, I can work with them to get what I want.
Oxide is too singular. It is one rack, one design, one set of specifications. Don't get me wrong, there is some value in that... and I'm sure you'll sell plenty of hardware, but I'm not finding the value in it for myself. That's the part that I mean by 'commodity'.
I'm not ignoring the software stack, I just don't see any value in the additional vendor lock in on it. I'd rather use open source stuff developed by a large community of people and not a single small vendor tied to a very specific and limited hardware stack.
I don't think they're planning on forcing you to buy their products :)
As far as I can tell, there exists no "open source stuff developed by a large community of people" to run integrated server rack hardware. But if you're using such a thing, then I'd like to know what it is!
If their SW and FW source code is MPL 2.0, that's good enough to limit the extent of vendor lock-in. Sure, it would take time to take over maintenance of that code and then add support for different HW and so on, but there can be a cottage industry of consultancies that can help if ever Oxide vendor lock-in or bankruptcy becomes a problem.
No it isn't good enough. This is a hardware play because you could theoretically take that software and run it on whatever hardware you want. You're not going with this business because of their open source software though, you're going with it because they are making innovative hardware.
If you're buying millions of this stuff, what says that you're going to get support for it in 5 years. Who knows... maybe Cisco wakes up and gives them an offer they can't refuse and then shuts down the company.
By the way, people endlessly gripe about Google deprecating things and that's just software...
Their hardware isn't really innovative though... Even the hardware integration isn't really innovative, as others here have pointed out.
My two cents is that this isn't really an innovation business model, it's an execution business model. Their proposition seems to be that they can execute a a server rack with integrated hardware and open-source software so well that customers will love their product.
Maybe they'll just end up with tons of nerds our there thinking, "I really wish I could justify investing in Oxide racks, but it just doesn't make sense for my business / I just can't sell it to my CIO", but hey, maybe not!
It's better to just think to yourself: "this doesn't seem like a useful product to me, I don't understand why people find it interesting, oh well", and move on.
No, I'm taking all of your words and distilling it down to a common saying.
I actually do think what they are doing is innovative across the board. They are taking all of the common feedback anyone who has run large scale data centers (which I have) and applying it to a brand new product. Unfortunately, they are doing it in a way that is extremely vendor specific.
`import { Api } from "@oxide/api"`
No, thanks.
`Understand and debug issues faster`
How is this any different than throwing Netdata onto a server?
One of the amazing shifts in the last 20 years was realizing that commodity hardware, when deployed correctly, could do the job.