Terminal – Virtual computers that start, resize, and scale in seconds
terminal.com
terminal.com
Don't worry about complex package management systems, or what environment a consumer of your program might have.
Just give them a copy of your environment: it will always work in the future."
I'm not convinced that a virtual machine snapshot is an adequate replacement for wrestling with a package manager. If all you distribute is a VM image, then:
- Users can't easily run your software without provisioning an entire virtual server and, as far as I can tell, giving Terminal money and their email address.
- Without active maintenance on your part, the other software on the image will get out of date. Security holes will be discovered in the versions of nginx and openssl that your image uses. Have you ever tried to upgrade a Linux box that hasn't been touched in a few years to the latest version? After a few years, every potential user of your software will have to go through that first.
- If Terminal goes out of business or pivots, your image will no longer work (I think?).
- Your software will not fit naturally into your users' deployment environments. It will not by default show up in their administration tools, know about their VPNs, integrate with their logging infrastructure, or appear on their graphs.
I think this makes a lot of sense as a low-friction way to distribute software, but if you're writing code that people will care about in a few years it shouldn't be the only way.
Every other implementation I've seen requires both too much security/administration expertise from my Mother and also, at the same time, too much expertise from the millions of random, BS developers around the world.
Also this seems VERY expensive compared with other VPS hosts. I'm using vultr and it seems a lot cheaper. $15/month vs $116.80 for rougly similar spec.
Am I missing something?
Software updates could be done the same way it always is: Run a script in a terminal that updates all packages. One could snapshot first, and verify that the updates do not break things.
What's missing, however, is how they do machine state snapshots (not supported in any container system afaik). I know Xen/VMWare support these, but if they are running atop AWS they will not have access to the hypervisor. I can imagine kludgily running another hypervisor atop AWS, but there would appear to be a more clever solution.
For those wondering: CRIU is Checkpoint/Restore In Userspace.
http://criu.org/Main_Page is the project, and http://criu.org/LXC is container support.
From a quick look, it seems that there are some limitations in CRIU, especially with LXC support, but it is work in the right direction.
https://openvz.org/Backup_of_a_running_container_with_vzdump
And it uses copy on write for even faster snap-shotting and consistency.
- It would be great to have share buttons so I can tweet examples of awesome code.
- Are you guys thinking of having an 'Import from GitHub' option? I'd love to use this as a REPL for my FOSS projects.
- Yash (Founder, Runnable.com)
The page layout resizes (top banner) every few seconds and crashes Chrome (iPad 2) after about one minute.
We are considering iOS support
Type CPU (%)
micro 2 (max)*
*Micro instances [...] are limited to 2 CPUs at best
So that indicates to me the pricing page is right and the FAQ header is wrong.We are a lot faster than a hypervisor. Our machines start in 5 seconds. Neither can resize a machine up and down live without a reboot. None of them can do RAM snapshots.
With that said, several hypervisors do support hot-resizing, snapshotting, and cross machine migration. Xen has excellent hot resize support, where VMWare has pushed hard for live migration and proper snapshotting over the years.
http://www.meetup.com/Terminal-com-Developers/events/1922628...
I currently use http://nitrous.io for ad-hoc linux terminal sessions with an integrated editor, and it looks like this does pretty much the same at what will be (for me) a fraction of the price.
I like nitrous, so am unlikely to move away - but I will be checking this offering out.
The editor could probably do with some polishing, and I'd need an obvious way to create and set environment variables.
There's some confusion for me as to what it is you're selling. Is it an adhoc terminal people can spin up when they need - or is it an application server? If just the former, then why have gitlab, and ghost in your images list. If the latter, then why the auto-shutdown on sessions, and what is relatively a high price for hosting.
Very excited to see this tech used for online computer science education. When I took CS classes (and TA'd them) it was always a royal pain in the ass to configure everything right on every student's personal computer / OS / etc. Being able to pre-install all the libraries, code, and data once and then blast it to everyone seems like a huge win. Not sure how the pricing would work for a large CS class (or even an online version) but hopefully they can figure that out.
How does that work?
I didn't know there were any computers that had 3,200 CPUs?
How would I test that?
Needless to say, we all walked away from the meeting, hit terminal.com and were puzzled as to why they didn't show us this version of the site. Our opinions/feedback would have been drastically different.
I'm looking forward to giving this version of terminal a proper run through. The overall concept I found very interesting.
[0]https://www.usenix.org/legacy/publications/library/proceedin...
What's interesting is that neither LXC nor Docker support memory snapshots (machine state), which Terminal.com has demonstrated. Xen, KVM, and VMWare do, but I can't really imagine people running these atop AWS infrastructure (Xen underneath).
Agree with what others are saying on the name. Terminal is spoken for.
Edit: It seems that the request must be made over HTTPS.
For context I was teaching a 'Girls Who Code' class last week introducing using command line tools to people that have never used them before. It's already hard to explain 'terminal == command line == console == shell'. I'd really hate if this company caught on and just confused the whole thing even more.
For instance, you could call your computing product Hammer, or call a rocket Hammer, or call a person Hammer (Mr. Martel or Mr. Burrell), or you can make a carpentry tool called the "Martel Hammer" or the "Burrell Hammer" or the "Rocket Hammer" or the "Lambda Calculus Hammer". But if you invent a new carpentry tool that is not a hammer, you don't get to call it "Hammer".
What would "ruby" have shown up just a couple years ago? or "Apple?"
From Wiktionary
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/terminal
Etymology
From French terminal, from Late Latin terminalis (“pertaining to a boundary or to the end, terminal, final”), from Latin terminus (“a bound, boundary, limit, end”); see term, terminus.
6. (computing) In the context of computer hardware, a device for entering data into a computer or a communications system and/or displaying data received, especially a device equipped with a keyboard and some sort of textual display.
7. (computing) A computer program that emulates a terminal (6).
Here are some logic-based criticisms:
1. A terminal (look at the root of the word) is not a computer -- it is an "end point" through which you can access a computer.
2. I don't think you can get a trademark on the name. If I'm wrong, then someone at the USPTO got bamboozled.
3. People like me are going to express negativity about your name. (But, hey, maybe any PR is good PR? Shameful, again.)
4. Where is the creativity? For shame, people.
So, please find another name, for your sake and ours. Groan.
P.S. I put CNN's "State of the Union" in roughly the same circle of hell.
A computer terminal ... is used for entering data into, and displaying data from, a computer or a computing system.