Nassi says the introduction of in-memory computing is like viewing the very same inflection level that was noticed in the days of VisiCalc and Lotus 123. He writes that many believed the spreadsheet principle was trivial and not really worth a serious person's time. In-memory computing was dismissed in some respects as men and women perceived the real chance becoming in analytics and massive database resources.

But it turned out that the "what-if" analytics and the immediate "finish-user programmability of significant info sets" that spreadsheets supplied ended up in fact what produced the Computer revolution transpire. The entire position is that VisiCalc and then Lotus one-two-3 could not have been done with out rapidly access to "in-memory" info. Single-handedly, big spreadsheets have been the system that drove the require for far more DRAM and in effect "marketed DRAM" to Computer users. Spreadsheets necessary to have all of the data in DRAM in buy to make genuine-time analytics, selection-support and "what-if'ing operate.

The "Groundhog" position here is that in-memory is when again driving the will need for company to get inquiries answered quick. In the early days of the Computer era, the spreadsheet forced Apple, Microsoft and Lotus to make far more memory offered. Nassi says it is why Apple improved the memory capacity of the first 128K Macintosh to 512K. In portion, the move was created to assistance Lotus.

He says nowadays "corporations are going to require programs that have far more addressable memory, keeping whole analytic "what-if" databases and, more importantly, they require not be just off-line computations, but an integral aspect of the selection-making procedure."

It will turn into normal to do what-if concerns and track the influence across the enterprise.

So, is Nassi appropriate? Is it Groundhog Day all above yet again?