But most people didn't need (or want) "real time" computing. They wanted "fast enough" computing, which generally meant interactive computing (not batch processing) that responded to requests quickly enough that clerks and bank tellers could answer customers' questions in a single conversation. Once we had interactive computing, we didn't look for "real time" and interest in the term waned.
To be fair to "real time", there *is* a definition of it, one that specifies the criteria for a real-time system. But very few systems actually fall under those criteria, and only a few people in the industry actually care about the term "real time". (Those that do care about the term really do care, though.)
Today, we're pursuing something equally nebulous: "big data".
Lots of people are interested in big data. Lots of marketers are getting involved, too. But do we have a clear understanding of the term?
I suspect that the usage of the term "big data" will follow an arc similar to that of "real time", because the forces driving the interest are similar. Both "real time" and "big data" are poorly defined yet sound cool. Further, I suspect that, like "real time", most people looking for "big data" are really looking for something else. Perhaps they want better analytics ("better" meaning faster, more frequent, more interaction and drill-down capabilities, or merely prettier graphics) for business analysis. Perhaps they want cheaper data storage. Perhaps they want faster development times and fewer challenges with database management.
Whatever the reason, in a few years (I think less than a decade) we will not be using the term "big data" -- except for a few folks who really need it and who really care about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment